Socio-Economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn in the Philippines

Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines

Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura MASIPAG 2013 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn in the Philippines

Published 2013 by Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura MASIPAG

2611 Carbern Village, Anos Los Baños, Laguna 4030 Philippines Telephone: 6349 536 5549 Email: [email protected] http://www.masipag.org

Cover design and layout: Red Leaf Printing Press ISBN: 978-971-94381-1-3 Research by: Ibon Foundation Inc Project Management and Coordination: Dr. Chito Medina, Eloisa Delos Reyes and Alfie Pulumbarit

MASIPAG is a network of farmers’ groups, scientists and non-government organizations in the Philippines seeking to improve farmers’ quality of life through their control over genetic resources, agricultural technology and associated knowledge.

Any part of this book may be reproduced for non-commercial education purposes. The publisher only asks that the source be cited and a copy of any reprint be sent to the MASIPAG office. Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines

Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura MASIPAG 2013

Table of Contents v Acknowledgement vii Foreword ix List of Acronyms

1 Introduction

3 1. Biotechnology in the Philippines

11 2. GM Corn Commercialization

23 3. GM corn: Benefitting TNC interests

29 4. Evidence from the Ground

59 5. People’s Resistance

63 Conclusions

69 Appendix 1: List of Respondents/Key Informants Interviewed

71 Appendix 2: Profile of Case Areas

74 Appendix 3: Summary of GM Corn Cost of Production

79 Appendix 4: Cost of GM Corn Production per Hectare in Brgy Bungsuan, Dumarao, Capiz

iii

Acknowledgements MASIPAG

Acknowledgement

“Lahat ng binhi ay pag-aari ng sangkatauhan. Sa paggamit ng sariling binhi ay may kalayaan ka; kalayaan sa sakit, kalayaan sa gastos, kalayaan sa pagsandal sa mga kumukontrol sa iyo na nagbebenta ng binhi at kemikal. Ito ay iyong karapatan, ito ay iyong pribilehiyo.”

Prefecto “Ka Pecs” Vicente

his paper is dedicated to the thousands of corn staff, especially Ma Carmela Ong Vano and Fe Dialino, farmers and their families, whose sacrifices and who assisted and provided the much needed logistical Thardships are testament to their effort to feed support. the nation. It is their stories of struggle and courage in facing the daily challenge of farming that is at the We are also thankful that a number of organizations center of this research. We hope that by writing this and individuals have supported us in the whole activity. paper, we can contribute in uplifting the life and These organizations, however small, are breaking new livelihood of the corn farmers. It is high time that grounds and are continuously finding ways so that their efforts be appreciated, and that their rights farmers may soon free themselves from debt, hunger safeguarded and protected. To the farmers and families and poverty. We thank the Resistance and Solidarity who have assisted us and shared their experience as Against Agrochemical TNCs (RESIST), Diony Yadao, well as accommodated and welcomed us during the Jesus Agustin, Jun Corpuz and Ben Cardenas of the study, we extend our heartfelt thanks. Danggayan Dagiti Mannalon ti Isabela (DAGAMI), Isabela Provincial Board Member Marcelino Espiritu, The research would not have been possible without the Chairperson Marlon Malong and the Gabay sa Bagong help of IBON Foundation Inc. We are very grateful that Pag-asa (GBP) Banaban and Macayo-cayo, Bayambang, a number of IBON staff was deployed to ensure that Pangasinan, Chris Chavez and John Ian Alenciaga of the research will be critical, substantive and objective. the Paghugpong sang mga Mangunguma sa Panay IBON Research Department Head Rosario Bella kag Guimaras (PAMANGGAS), Organic Farm Field Guzman guided in the research conceptualization and Experimentation Research Station (OFFERS-Panay) in editing; Maria Jennifer Haygood-Guste facilitated the particular Bernie Cervo, Salvert Magapa and Angelito group discussions and interviews, and writing the GM Estopido, Melchor Asupardo of the Kahublagan Sang corn paper; and IBON Researchers Glenis Balangue, Mangunguma sa Capiz (KAMACA), Edmundo and Lomel Buena and Carla Maria Issa Cesar ensured the Noel Magallanes of Quinabonglan Small Farmers quality of research in every level during the field study. Association, Hirminigilda Salolog and the Binhi Farmers Association, Mindagat Integrated and Regional MASIPAG offices also extended efforts in Sustainable Farming Association (MISFA) in particular order to assist the researchers in the entire phase of the Councilor Maximo Narvasa, Hannibal Prado and the study. To Cristino Panerio, Georita Pitong and Bobby Banga Farmers for Sustainable Agriculture, and church Pagusara; Masipag regional coordinators for Luzon, worker of the Parish Social Action Center, Sto Nino, Visayas and Mindanao respectively, for assisting and South Cotabato Mr. Felix ‘Loloy’ Villarta. ensuring the orderly and safe conduct of the research in the focus areas. To the MASIPAG regional staff - Julie Our gratitude to the Action Solidarité Tiers Monde Jose, Mario Denito, Analyn Diaz, Josephine Anacay, (ASTM), for the support it has extended to the Jeonard Santillan and Geonathan Barro; the research advocacy work of MASIPAG. We also thank our long would have been a daunting task without your term international partners MISEREOR and the Swedish support in coordinating with the local communities Society for Nature Conservation (SSNC), as well as the and authorities. Also to the Masipag National Office Swedish Catholic Lenten Fund (SCLF) and DKA Austria.

Foreword MASIPAG

Foreword

en years ago, the Philippine government These include the emergence of superweeds as well as approved the commercial propagation of Bt corn. shifting of dominant insect pests, and contamination TSince then, eight GMO corn varieties had been of non-GM crops. Likewise, price of GM seeds approved for commercial propagation in the form of have become exorbitant and farmers income has Bt corn, RR corn and a combination of pyramided and dramatically declined, sometimes negative. stacked traits of the same GM transformation events. Over the same period, fifty nine GMO crops/events While evidences on the health and environmental were also approved for importation for direct use as effects of GMOs are accumulating, the data on socio- food, feed, and for processing. economic impacts of GMOs are very few. Thus, MASIPAG engaged the services of IBON foundation The current wide cultivation of GM corn, estimated at to elucidate the socio-economic impacts of GMOs on more than 600,000 ha, had been used as the surrogate farmers. evidence for the benefits of corn farmers. Their logic states that no farmer would plant GM corn unless they This book attempts to unravel how GM corn has benefit from doing so. But behind the veneer of rapid changed the landscape of corn farming in the country. expansion of GM corn planting is the aggressive and Perhaps, the socio-economic changes brought about well capitalized propaganda machine of the biotech by GM corn would serve as “late lessons from early companies, enabled and supported by pro-GMO policy warning”. We hope that agriculture policy makers and program of the government, and enhanced by will open up their eyes and minds to develop policy promotional arrangements by local financier-traders, responses in favor of small scale farmers in the light of and seed/agro-chemical companies. the new evidences. This research is very timely as other GM crops, such as Bt eggplant and golden rice, are in Promoters of GM crops always recite a litany of benefits the process of testing towards commercialization. including better yield, less pesticides, safe to eat, environmentally friendly and good for biodiversity, We dedicate this book to MASIPAG farmers who are climate change mitigation, and improved income of very determined and active in the development of local farmers despite lack of sufficient evidence. In other seeds and diversified and sustainable farming systems times, the benefits are drum beaten in isolation which are truly alternative to modern biotechnology. with other important socio-economic factors. Risk acceptability which normally lie in the realm of policy and social acceptability are mostly dictated by pro- GMO technical people. Dr. Charito P. Medina There is now a growing evidence on the adverse effects National Coordinator of GM food and crops on health and environmental. MASIPAG

vii

Foreword MASIPAG

List of Acronyms

AO Administrative Order ARB Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries BAI Bureau of Animal Industry BAS Bureau of Agriculture Statistics BCT Biotech Core Team BIOTECH National Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology BLSB Banded Leaf and Sheath Blight BPI Bureau of Plant Industry Bt Bacillus thuringiensis CPH Corn Plant Hopper CSO Civil Society Organization DA Department of Agriculture DAGAMI Danggayan Dagiti Mannalon ti Isabela DENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources DFA Department of Foreign Affairs DILG Department of Interior and Local Government DNA Deoxyribonucleic Acid DOH Department of Health DOST Department of Science and Technology DTI Department of Trade and Industry EO Executive Order ERDB Ecosystems Research and Development Bureau FGD Focused Group Discussion FPA Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority GBP Gabay sa Bagong Pag-asa GMO Genetically Modified Organism GOCC Government Owned and Controlled Corporations GVA Gross Value Added Ht Herbicide tolerant IPB Institute of Plant Breeding IRRI International Rice Research Institute ISAAA International Service for the Acquisition of Agribiotech Applications KAMACA Kahublagan Sang Mangunguma sa Capiz KII Key Informant Interviews LBP Land Bank of the Philippines LGU Local Government Unit MAO Municipal Agriculture Officer MASIPAG Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura MDG Medium Development Goals MENRO Municipal Environment and Natural Resources Office MGPC Mindanao Grains Processing Co. MMT Million Metric Tons MISFA Mindagat Integrated Farming Association NABCOR National Agribusiness Corporation NCBP National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines NFA National Food Authority OFFERS Organic Farm Field Experimentation Research Station OPV Open Pollinated Variety PAFMI Philippine Association of Feed Millers Inc PAMANGGAS Paghugpong sang mga Mangunguma sa Panay kag Guimaras

ix Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

PCASTRD Philippine Council for Advanced Sciences Research and Development PD Presidential Decree PhilMaize Philippine Maize Federation, Inc Php Philippine peso PPP Pesticide Protected Plants RESIST Resistance and Solidarity Against Agrochemical TNCs RMCC Reina Mercedes Corn Processing Center RFU Regional Field Unit RR Roundup Ready SA Sustainable Agriculture UPLB University of the Philippines Los Baños USDA-FAS US Department of Agriculture – Foreign Agricultural Service TNC Transnational Companies WTO World Trade Organization

x Introduction MASIPAG

Introduction

n December 4, 2002, the Bureau of Plant of negative health impacts on animals using GM Industry approved the commercial propagation corn are being documented by independent experts. Oof Mon 810, more popularly known as Bacillus Problems on the effect of GMOs in the environment thuringiensis (Bt) corn, the first genetically modified such as emergence of pest resistance, soil erosion, and organism to be released in the country. contamination among others are also being observed. More so, the negative socio-economic impacts to small The approval was issued despite widespread farmers are being felt, but there is yet a study that has protests from farmers, consumers, including medical attempted to shed light on the issue. professionals and scientists. Resistance stems largely from the inadequate scientific research that would At present, a new wave of GMOs are being tested attest without doubt the safety of the technology on in the country; Bt eggplant (Bt talong) and Golden human health and the environment and disregard on Rice. Propagation is being planned in the absence of farmer’s rights due to the privatization of seeds. a critical assessment of the long-term impact of the GM corn commercialization on farmers’ livelihood, Bt corn proponents led by transnational giant consumer health, animal health, and the environment. Monsanto, the Philippine government, and some Therefore, there is an urgent need to analyze the socio- scientists from the University of the Philippines Los economic impact of GM corn before proceeding with Baños insist that the propagation of Bt corn will solve further commercialization of other GM crops. the problem of corn borer infestation and increase the productivity and income of Filipino corn farmers. This research aims to: 1) document the effects of GM They also claim that Bt corn is safe, has proven benefits corn, with emphasis on the socio-economic aspect, to biodiversity, and helps reduce carbon dioxide on the small-scale farmers in the provinces where GM emissions due to assumed lessened use of chemicals. corn has been planted extensively; 2) describe the operations of agrochemical TNCs, landlords, traders, Ten years after, proponents have boasted increase in local government, and quasi-government scientists income by Filipino farmers who have adopted the GM in promoting GMOs in the country; 3) determine the technology, reduction on pesticide application and changes in the structures of ownership and control of even climate change mitigation. However, evidences the selected communities over the land, natural and

1 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

genetic resources as results of planting GMOs; and 4) approval of any international regulation or protocols elaborate the ongoing resistance of the communities that would have an effect in the promotion and the against GMOs propagation in the country. liberalization of GMOs across countries.

The paper has six parts: Part Four discusses the results of field research conducted in selected GM corn-producing provinces Part One discusses the Philippine experience in in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. It also discusses the biotechnology, and the technology behind genetic interplay of sectors in the corn industry, including the modification of living organisms, specifically Bt corn. agrochemical TNCs and their local counterpart, the The discussion includes government regulation and players in GM corn production, trade and marketing, guidelines and the roles of specific government as well as government’s role in the promotion of the agencies in the monitoring of GMO testing, importation use of GM corn in support of its full-scale countrywide and propagation. commercial production.

Part Two discusses the country’s experience in GM Part Five presents the local struggles against GM crops corn commercialization and its impact on the country’s propagation in the country. corn sector. Finally, Part Six provides the conclusion and Part Three discusses the role of agrochemical TNCs in recommendations for policy alternatives. the promotion of GMOs, their interests in the global food chain including lobbying efforts both in their home countries and the international arena in the

2 I. Biotechnology in the Philippines MASIPAG

I. Biotechnology in the Philippines

iotechnology is a set of techniques that involves 1980s that ushered in a new era of industrial revolution the use of biological processes and living – the other one being information technology or IT.6 Borganisms for industry, agricultural or other GMOs are then to be the centerpiece of a new wave activities. Its purpose is to modify the natural and of green revolution promoted by developed countries biological processes of living organisms without and TNCs purportedly to solve the problem of low necessarily altering the genes or genetic construct productivity and hunger among the poor population of the living organisms. It has four major industrial especially in underdeveloped countries. processes based on biological systems, namely cell and tissue culture, fermentation, enzyme technology, Modern biotechnology is a multi-billion dollar and genetic engineering – also referred to as modern technology that has benefited TNCs especially those biotechnology.1 2 in the so-called life sciences industry, led by Monsanto of the US which has pioneered in the research and Genetic engineering or recombinant DNA development (R&D) of GMOs in the last decades. The (deoxyribonucleic acid) technology differs from other most successful are GM crops such as GM soybean, GM forms of biotechnology as it allows the isolation corn, and GM cotton. GM crops are the most lucrative and transfer of genes coding specific characteristics products of modern biotechnology because these between living organisms to produce a new living are agricultural crops widely consumed by the global organism that expresses the desired characteristics of population.7 both organisms.3 4 Genetic engineering has earned huge profits for Genetically modified organisms or GMOs is the leading biotechnology centers in the US, Europe, common term used for genetically engineered Canada and Australia, with an aggregate net profit of organisms.5 US$4.7 billion in 2010. R&D meanwhile has reached US$22.8 billion.8 GMOs: Gene Revolution The sale of GMO seeds alone in 2010 was valued at Modern biotechnology or genetic engineering is said US$11.2 billion. In the last 15 years that GMOs were to be one of the major technological advances in the being planted, from 1996 to 2010, total accumulated

3 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

seeds sales reached US$73.5 billion. These figures are were transferred under the regulation of the DA-BPI only for the sale of seeds and licensing revenues and while confined testing remained with the NCBP. do not include sales from chemicals such as herbicides, among others.9 EO 514 or the National Biosafety Framework was issued in 2006, which strengthened the role of NCBP Biotechnology in the Philippines in the regulation of GMOs. The Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG), Department of Trade The Philippines has always been involved in and Industry (DTI), Department of Foreign Affairs agricultural research by virtue of it being the host of (DFA), and appointed representatives from the public the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI). The and private sectors have been included as members of Institute of Plant Breeding (IPB) at the University of the NCBP. the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB) is the one mainly involved in agricultural research producing numerous Today in collaboration with public and private crop varieties. institutions both local and abroad, biotechnology research for the development of GM crops is being The first R&D institute on biotechnology was conducted in the country, with the Philippines being established at UPLB in 1979. Through the Letter of considered as a leader in biotechnology in Asia and a Instruction No. 1005 from then president Ferdinand ‘model’ for other countries in the aspect of biosafety E. Marcos issued on March 1980, the National Treasury regulations. released Php10 million to fund the establishment of the National Institutes for Applied Microbiology Philippine Biosafety Guidelines and Biotechnology, now known as National Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology (BIOTECH), The NCBP follows the Philippine Biosafety Guidelines mandated to apply biotechnology research to develop issued in 1998. It originated from the report in 1997 industrial processes and improve food production and of the ad-hoc committee on biosafety composed of food processing.10 11 representatives from the UPLB, IRRI and DA, which in turn was patterned after the biosafety guidelines of In 1986, the Department of Science and Technology Australia, US, and Japan. (DOST) declared biotechnology as one of the leading edge technologies and was one of the major research The Philippine Biosafety Guidelines covers work areas supported by the newly established Philippine involving genetic engineering and activities requiring Council for Advanced Sciences Research and the importation, introduction, field release and Development (PCASTRD). Majority of R&D projects breeding of non-indigenous or exotic organisms in BIOTECH and PCASTRD, however, focused on even though these are not genetically modified. Its traditional biotechnology. contents include the organizational structure for biosafety; procedures for evaluation of proposals with In 1990, Executive Order (EO) 430 was issued creating biosafety concerns; procedures and guidelines on the the inter-agency National Committee on Biosafety introduction, movement and field release of regulated of the Philippines (NCBP). The members of the NCBP materials; and physico-chemical and biological initially were the DOST, DA, the Department of containment and procedures. Health (DOH), and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).12 The creation of the The country’s guidelines are based on the international NCBP was in response to the entry of new strains of protocols that the Philippines had ratified, such as the rice pathogens for research (rice blast), and so its United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, guidelines which were formulated in 1991 focused Philippine-ratified on October 8, 1993, and the only on the regulation of traditional biotechnology. In Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety on August 14, 2006. 1998, the guidelines crafted for biosafety evolved to cover research activities on GMOs. For GM crops, there are three levels of regulation: under laboratory/greenhouse/screenhouse test which Until 2002, the NCBP was the sole regulatory body is the mandate of DOST-NCBP; field test either single overseeing biosafety in the country, including or multi-location which is the mandate of DA; and the regulating contained and confined as well as open field propagation or commercial stage which is also under trials. With the issuance of DA Administrative Order the DA.13 No. 8 in April 2002, however, field trials and release

4 I. Biotechnology in the Philippines MASIPAG

DA AO No. 8 of 2002 is the sole basis on the Importation either for direct use as food or feed or for commercialization of GMOs which provide rules and processing should be duly authorized by the BPI. DA regulation on the importation and release into the AO No. 8 also states that no article shall be allowed environment of plants and plant products derived for importation unless it has been “authorized for from the use of genetic engineering. commercial distribution as food or feed in the country of origin and it poses no significant risks to human and GMOs in the Philippines animal health.” The BPI also requires for all shipments of regulated articles to the Philippines be accompanied The DOST-NCBP is the agency responsible for issuing by a corresponding declaration of GMO content. the permit for testing in confined or contained environment. The DA-BPI, on the other hand, is All GMOs that passed the BPI risk assessments are responsible for issuing the required permits for field listed in its approval registry available at its website. testing and propagation and commercialization. As of February 12, 2012, there are eight regulated GMOs approved for propagation, all of which are GM The DA AO No. 8 covers the following concerns: corn (Table 1). These include two insect-resistant corn 1. Regulation of the importation, use and commercial (the Bt corn, resistant to the Asian Corn Borer), two propagation of GM crops herbicide-tolerant (HT) corn (resistant to glyphosate), 2. Requires step by step introduction of GM crop into two stacked corn varieties (BT/RR or roundup the environment ready), one advanced BT (MON 89034) or the so- 3. All GM crops intended for planting called pyramided variety corn, and one stacked corn a. must undergo experiments under contained (advanced BT x herbicide tolerant). “Pyramided” means use more than two genes were incorporated into the corn b. must undergo field trials in the Philippines variety while “stacked” pertains to GMOs containing two genes. Meanwhile, “transformation events” In field testing, the article should have been tested pertain to the process that transfers the desired gene under contained conditions in the Philippines. In into the recipient organism.14 propagation, the article, after having been field tested, should show that it would not pose any significant risks At present, GMOs approved for direct importation for to the environment and human and animal health. If use as food and feed or for processing include 32 single the regulated article is a pest-protected plant, it should transformation events and 27 stacked genes. These be duly registered with the Fertilizer and Pesticide include GM soybean, corn, potato, cotton, alfalfa, Authority (FPA). canola and sugarbeet. In total, about 67 GMO crops

Huge tracts of land dedicated to the planting of Bt corn in the town of Bayambang, Pangasinan.

5 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 1. GMOs Approved for Propagation in the Philippines (as of February 23, 2012) Transformation Event* Introduced Trait and Gene Date Approved Technology Developer 1. Corn GA 21 Contains modified epsps gene from corn which confers tolerance to 11/24/2009 Syngenta Philippines herbicides 2. Corn MON810 Contains cry1Ab gene from Bacillus thuringiensis var kurstaki which confers 12/3/2007 Monsanto Philippines resistance to corn borer (renewal) 3. Corn NK603 Contains cp4epsps coding sequence from Agrobacterium sp. CP4 strain which 03/16/2010 Monsanto Philippines confers tolerance to the Roundup family of agricultural herbicides (renewal) 4. Corn Bt 11/a Contains the cry1Ab gene from Bacillus thuringiensis and pat gene from 04/23/2010 Syngenta Philippines Streptomyces viridochromogenes which confers resistance to corn borer and (renewal) tolerance to herbicide, respectively 5.Corn MON89034/b Contains the cry1A.105 cry2Ab2 genes from Bacillus thuringiensis that are 11/19/2010 Monsanto Philippines active against lepidopteran insects 6.Corn Bt11 x Corn GA21/c Contains the cry1Ab gene from Bacillus thuringiensis and pat gene from 6-Sep-10 Syngenta Philippines Streptomyces viridochromogenes which confers resistance to corn borer and tolerance to herbicide respectively and modified epsps gene from corn which confers tolerance to herbicides 7. Corn MON89034 x Corn NK603/c Contains two genes (cry1A.105 and cry2Ab2) from Bacillus thuringiensis 4-Mar-11 Monsanto Philippines which protect the plant from Asiatic corn borer, common cutworm and corn earworm and cp4epsps coding sequence from Agrobacterium sp CP4 strain which confers tolerance to the Roundup family of agricultural herbicides. ~~Contains the cry1A.105 and cry2Ab2 genes from Bacillus thuringiensis that are active against lepidopteran insects and cp4epsps coding sequence from Agrobacterium sp. CP4 strain which confers tolerance to the Roundup family of agricultural herbicides 8. Corn MON810 x Corn NK603/c Contains cry1Ab gene from Bacillus thuringiensis var kurstaki which confers 7/16/2010 Monsanto Philippines resistance to corn borer and cp4epsps coding sequence from Agrobacterium (renewed) sp. CP4 strain which confers tolerance to the Roundup family of agricultural herbicides * Transformation events approved for propagation are also approved for direct use for food and feed or for processing. /a Advanced Bt /b Pyramided - contains four or more genes from different organisms /c Stacked or combined varieties - contains genes from two different organisms Source: Bureau of Plant Industry

were approved by the DA-BPI for food, feed and for Questioning the Regulatory Process processing. All regulated GMOs are given a five-year permit for commercialization and propagation. After Despite being touted as the regional leader in five years, the permit may be renewed for another five biotechnology policy and regulation, the Philippine years, without clear basis for extension of the permit government is at the center of criticisms for lacking granted. transparency and accountability when it comes to GMOs. Civil society organizations (CSOs) including Meanwhile, there are 13 GMOs approved for field anti-GMO activists, consumers, and even government testing. officials in agencies supposedly involved in the regulatory process observe flaws in the current The DA approved the commercial propagation of Bt biosafety regulatory system. Questions center on corn or MON 810 of Monsanto on December 4, 2002. the granting of permits and the legality of the whole Since 2003, the hectarage devoted to Bt corn increased process of approval. There seems to be an apparent from 10,679 to 685,317 hectares (has.) in 2011. Genetic lack of understanding of the respective roles by traits were added to the Bt corn that made it resistant to government agencies involved. There is also the herbicides particularly Monsanto’s signature Roundup general lack of knowledge among farmers, including Ready herbicide (glyphosate). even local government officials, on the effects of planting the GM corn.

6 I. Biotechnology in the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 2. GMOs Approved for Field Testing in the Philippines (as of July 6, 2011) Proposal Technology Developer Date Approved 1. Demonstration of Weed Control Performance of Roundup Ready Corn (RRC) System DK818 NK603 Monsanto Philippines Nov. 26, 2004 vis-a-vis Farmers’ Practices 2. Performance of Roundup Herbicide (360 g ae/L IPA Salt) Against Weeds in Glyphosate-Tolerant corn Monsanto Philippines Nov. 26, 2004 3. Field Verification of the Agronomic Performance of the Transgenic Corn (Zea mays L.) Hybrid Stacked Monsanto Philippines Dec. 10, 2004 (NK603/MON810) Expressing the Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ab Protein for Resistance against the Asiatic Corn Borer (Ostrinia furnacalis Guenee) and CP4EPSPS for Tolerance Against the Herbicide Roundup 4. Performance of Herculex 1 Bt Transgenic Corn Hybrids Against Asiatic Corn Borer (Ostrinia furnacalis Dow AgroSciences 2-May-06 Guenee) Under Field Conditions in the Philippines 5. Field Testing of Transgenic Papaya with Delayed Ripening Trait Institute of Plant Breeding - Crop Mar. 20, 2007 Science Cluster, UP, Los Baños, Laguna 6. Multi-location Field Efficacy Verification Trial of Herbicide Tolerant Maize Expressing Event GA21 Syngenta Philippines Nov. 19, 2007 Against Glyphosate Herbicide in the Philippines 7. Agronomic Equivalency Trial of MON89034 Hybrids with Regulatory Framework in the Philippines Monsanto Philippines Aug. 1, 2008 8. Field Verification of the Agronomic Performance of Transgenic Corn (Zea mays L.) line MON89034 Monsanto Philippines Aug. 1, 2008 Expressing the Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1A.105 and Cry2Ab Proteins for Efficacy Against Lepidopterous Pest of Corn 9. Field Verification for the Agronomic Performance of Stacked Hybrid Corn (Zea mays L.) MON89034 Monsanto Philippines Aug. 1, 2008 x NK603 Expressing the Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1A.105 and Cry2Ab2 Proteins for Efficacy Against Lepidopterous Pests of Corn and CP4EPSPS for Tolerance of Round up Herbicide 10. Multi-location Field Efficacy Trial of Corn Hybrid Expressing the Stacked Trait BT11 x GA21 Against the Syngenta Philippines Oct. 28, 2009 Asiatic Corn Borer and Glyphosate Herbicide in the Philippines 11. Development and Commercialization of Philippine Fruit and Shoot Borer (FSB) Resistant Eggplants University of the Philippines Los Baños Mar. 16, 2010 Containing MAHYCO Bt Eggplant Event, EE-1: Multi location Field Trials for Biosafety Assessment, Variety and Accreditation and Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA) Registration Jun 28, 2010 12. Field Verification of the Agronomic Performance of Transgenic corn (Zea mays L.) Line TC1507 Pioneer Hi-Bred Philippines 19-Apr-11 Expressing the Bacillus thuringiensis Proteins for Efficacy Against Asiatic Corn Borer and the PAT Proteins for tolerance to Glufosinate /a Herbicide 13. Field Verification of the Agronomic Performance of Transgenic Corn (Zea mays L.) Hybrid Stacked Pioneer Hi-Bred Philippines 19-Apr-11 (TC1507 x MON810 x NK603) Expressing the Bacillus thuringiensis Proteins for Efficacy Against Asiatic Corn Borer and the Proteins PAT and CP4-EPSPS for Tolerance to Glufosinate /a and Glyphosate Herbicides /a considered as “slightly hazardous” by the World Health Organization (WHO). It is ‘persistent’ and ‘mobile’ when released in the environment, in the soil and water; toxic to a number of aquatic animals including the larvae of clams and oysters(29), daphnia and some freshwater fish species . Source: Bureau of Plant Industry

Ten years after the approval of the first GMO release, take the lead in evaluating and monitoring regulated the government has yet to finalize the Manual on articles intended for bioremediation, the improvement of Biosafety Decision Making Process drafted in 2006 forest genetic resources, and wildlife genetic resources”. by virtue of EO 514. The manual targeted the active However, according to the Ecosystems Research involvement of different government agencies and Development Bureau (ERDB) of the DENR, only strategic to the effective monitoring of GMOs in when the manual is approved shall the DENR do its the country. Procedural guidelines have yet to be assignment on environmental risk assessment and approved after undergoing four revisions and various monitoring.15 Moreover, the ERDB said that DENR has consultations, the most recent ones having been done no role in the implementation of the DA AO No. 8 when in the first quarter of 2012. ironically the DA AO No. 8 provides the guidelines on the monitoring of field testing, multi-location and For example, EO 514 mandates the DENR to conduct propagation of GM crops.16 monitoring under Section 4.9, to wit: “The DENR shall ensure that environmental assessments are done and At present, it is the DA’s Bureau of Plant Industry and impacts identified in biosafety decisions. It shall also Plant Quarantine Service which is in charge of the

7 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 3. Aggregate Data of GE Corn Planted 2003-2010 (hectares) YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Bt Corn LUZON 10,158 48,516 43,735 85,702 103,438 68,301 38,507 37,115 VISAYAS 24 534 445 405 2,551 298 0 0 MINDANAO 587 10,706 5,829 10,693 16,604 13,053 9,516 3,120 Total 10,769 59,756 50,009 96,800 122,593 81,652 48,023 40,235 21,007 RR Corn LUZON 11,685 54,509 5,471 3,518 642 VISAYAS 4,424 8,925 4,571 2,790 0 MINDANAO 10,384 56,589 41,443 40,501 8,048 Total 26,493 120,023 51,485 46,809 8,690 15,038 Stacked (Bt + RR) LUZON 3,879 59,346 158,520 183,771 373,079 VISAYAS 232 2,472 7,074 8,006 5,366 MINDANAO 469 9,461 48,844 40,618 115,153 Total 4,580 71,279 214,438 232,395 493,598 643,808 Pyramided Total 5,464 GRAND TOTAL 10,769 59,756 50,009 127,873 313,895 347,575 327,226 542,522 685,317 Source: Bureau of Plant Industry

post-commercial monitoring. The DOST Biosafety FPA) are PPPs found. The BPI-BCT has assigned a staff at Committee on the other hand is in charge of regulating the FPA to do regulatory assessment of PPPs submitted the greenhouse testing. The DENR has not done any by agrochemical TNCs. But the staff does not have post monitoring of field-tested GMOs or planted at the technical qualifications required to conduct the commercial scale in relation to biodiversity and the assessments and approval.18 environment. The DOH has also not done any post release monitoring on the impact of GM corn on the Even officials of the Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI), farmers and their families who consume GM corn as which supposedly has a role in the regulation of GM food. feeds, seem to be not aware of their specific roles in regulating and monitoring GMOs. The BAI cannot even Even at the BPI level, no post release monitoring has ever categorically say that it has been consulted on GM been done in the last 10 years of the commercialization crops as feeds.19 of the GM corn. Monitoring is supposed to be done by the BPI-Biotech Core Team (BPI-BCT). According to the After a decade, only the BPI is involved in GMO BPI-BCT, they have only limited personnel and cannot regulation and monitoring. The DA apparently is possibly conduct post release monitoring unless there not keen on involving other government agencies. is request from the farm level for an assessment.17 Industry players are quite content with this situation. However, damning evidences and experiences about Meanwhile, even the FPA does not have approval the GM technology have been recorded throughout and regulatory guidelines especially for pesticide the globe, and calls for safety studies persist. Things protected plants (PPPs) such as Bt corn. These are yet are happening fast, yet the Philippine government to be finalized as nowhere in its so-called green book has not done a systematic assessment of GMO (implementing guidelines for PD 1114 that created the commercialization.

8 I. Biotechnology in the Philippines MASIPAG

Corn is being planted by using either feet or seed planting tools so-called “armalite” or “jabber”.

9 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Endnotes

1 “Genetic Engineering and Genetically Modified Organisms in Agriculture”. MASIPAG, September, 2000, Second Version, page 18 of 67 pages. 2 “Transnational Corporations in Biotechnology”. United Nations Centre on Transnational Corporations, New York 1988, page 8 of 34 pages. Accessed at http://unctc.unctad.org/data/e88iia4a.pdf 3 “Transnational Corporations in Biotechnology”, 1988, Ibid., page 2; italicized word supplied by IBON; A more technical definition would be “the application of (a) in vitro nucleic acid techniques, including recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or direct injection of nucleic acid into cells or organelles; or (b) fusion of cells beyond the taxonomic family, that overcome natural physiological reproductive or recombination barriers and that are not techniques of traditional breeding or selection” characteristic of so-called conventional hybrid crops. Italicized words supplied by IBON, see Executive Order 514 strengthening the National Biosafety Committee of the Philippines (NCBP), issued in 2006. 4 DNA contains the biological instructions that make each species unique. DNA, along with the instructions it contains, is passed from adult organisms to their offspring during reproduction. Each DNA sequence that contains instructions to make a protein is known as a gene. The size of a gene may vary greatly, ranging from about 1,000 bases to 1 million bases in humans. DNA contains the instructions needed for an organism to develop, survive and reproduce. To carry out these functions, DNA sequences must be converted into messages that can be used to produce proteins, which are the complex molecules that do most of the work in our bodies. Recombinant DNA (rDNA) is made of segments of DNA (polymers of deoxyribonucleotides) from two or more sources. Nature has been recombining DNA in living cells for eons, but humans have only recently discovered the means to carry out this operation in the test tube. The procedure used for preparing recombinant DNA or rDNA is referred to as genetic engineering. See http://www.genome.gov/25520880/ and http://www. chemistryexplained.com/Pr-Ro/Recombinant-DNA.html#b 5 The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which embodies the international rules and procedures governing genetically engineered organisms refers to GMOs as living modified organisms of LMOs. For the purposes of discussion, we shall refer to these genetically engineered organisms as GMOs. 6 United Nations Centre on Transnational Corporations, 1988, page 8 of 34 pages. 7 Life science became so-called as large TNCs in the pharmaceutical and agrochemical industries merged as they focused on biotechnologies. They later on re-divided their operations while remaining in their mergers. See Howard, Philip H. “Visualizing Consolidation in the Global Seed Industry: 1996-2008”, in Sustainability Journal, Published 8 December 2009. Accessed at http:// www.mdpi.com/journal/ sustainability 8 Earnst and Young, “Beyond Borders: Global Biotechnology Report 2011. Accessed at http://www.ey.com/GL/en/Industries/Life-Sciences/ Beyond-borders--global-biotechnology-report-2011 9 James, Clive. “Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2010”. ISAAA Brief No. 42. Published by The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), copyright 2010, page 222 of 279 pages. Accessed at http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/42/download/isaaa-brief-42-2010.pdf 10 See http://old.uplb.edu.ph/biotech/aboutus 11 “The National Biosafety Framework for the Philippines”. Department of Environment and Natural Resources-Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau. 2004. Quezon City, Philippines, page 16 of 77 pages. Accessed at… See also Richmond, Christina L. “Genetically Modified Crops In The Philippines: Can Existing Biosafety Regulations Adequately Protect The Environment?”. Copyright © 2006 Pacific Rim Law & Policy Journal Association, 30 pages); and Corpuz, Jennifer. ‘Integrating Issues of Ethics, Socio-economics and Sustainability in Philippine Policy on GMOs and Regulations on Biosafety’ in “Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines: Addressing Traditional Knowledge, Food Security, Mining and GMOs”. Volume VII, No. 2, Indigenous Perspectives, Copyright 2005 by the Tebtebba Foundation, 121 pages. Accessed at http://www.google.com.ph/ search?rlz=1C1CHJW_enPH468PH468&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=Indigenous+Peoples+of+the+Philippines%3A+Addressing+Traditio nal+Knowledge%2C+Food+Security%2C+Mining+and+GMOs 12 Ibid. 13 Sinohin, Veronica O., Supervising Science Research Specialist, TDD-ERDB and Alternate representative to the DOST-Biosafety Committee. Answered queries via e-mail, April 11, 2012. 14 BPI Biotech Core Team, interview with Ms. Thelma Soriano, April 11, 2012 15 Sinohin, Veronica O., April 11, 2012 16 Ibid 17 BPI Biotech Core Team, April 11, 2012 18 Informal interviews with FPA Senior Officials, April 4 and 10, 2012.

10 II. GM Corn Commercialization MASIPAG

II. GM Corn Commercialization

he Philippines, which produces about 6.9 million metric tons (MMT) of corn annually is Figure 1. Distribution of Agricultural Land Tthe only country in Asia to approve and grow a By Crop, 2010 (in thousand hectares) major biotech feed crop – the GM corn. According to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri- Cereals, 6,853.2 Biotech Applications (ISAAA), the country has also (Palay, 4,534.2 & Corn, 2,499.0) Coconut, 3,575.9 achieved the biotech mega-country status, whatever that means, with its production of GM corn over more than 50,000 hectares or more since 2004, as corn Banana, 449.4 farmers started planting the GM corn since 2003.1 Sugarcane, 354.9 Profile of the corn sector Cassava, 217.6 Other Crops, 1,354.50 Corn (Zea mays), or maize in the international market, is the third most widely planted agricultural crop in Source: Bureau of Agricultural Statistics the Philippines. Total area planted to corn covered roughly 2.5 million hectares in 2010 or about 19.5% of total agricultural land. (Figure 1) This however covers Philippine economy in 2010, which increased by 25.6% the total area planted for the two cropping seasons to Php87.6 billion in 2011. Meanwhile, estimates place annually. Actual corn area is 1.5 million hectares in the number of corn farmers at 1.8 million.3 2010.2 The country produces both white and yellow corn. Bureau of Agriculture Stastics (BAS) 2010 data show Historically, the total production and area devoted that corn contributed Php18.8 billion to the country’s to white corn were much larger than yellow corn. gross value added (GVA) at constant prices or about With the growing demand for yellow feed corn for 12.5% of the country’s total agricultural production. At the expanding livestock and poultry industries, current prices, corn contributed Php69.7 billion to the production and area devoted for yellow corn increased

11 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

especially with the introduction of open pollinated Box 1 : Corn Types varieties (OPVs). The OPVs were later replaced by hybrid varieties aggressively marketed by private Traditional or Native Corn Varieties – have good seed companies and local traders.4 As of 2011, hybrid eating and milling qualities. They have tolerance to varieties of corn comprised 43% of total area planted the common pests and diseases especially downy to corn while native/traditional OPVs comprised 31 mildew disease and do not require fertilizers and percent. (Figure 2) chemical sprays. They are adapted to marginalized soils. Improved or Modern OPVs – in the form of synthetics Figure 2. Philippines Corn Area Harvested or composites are developed by state universities (%GM Corn), 2011 such as the UPLB and University of Southern Mindanao, which to some extent replaced the Native OPV, Hybrid, traditional native varieties. 792.668 (31%) 1,096,355 (43%) Corn hybrids – are products of global private seed TNCs like Monsanto, Syngenta, Pioneer and Cargill, including domestic seed companies like East-West, Corn World and Bioseed. These varieties are bred for high yields, large corn ears, responsiveness to fertilizers, resistance to lodging, tolerance to diseases Modern OPV, like downy mildew, and high shelling recovery. 655,589 (26%) About 90% of the total hectarage for yellow corn is now planted to hybrids. A good part of the hybrid corn plantings is GM corn with Bt and glyphosate- 5 Over the period 1970-2009, yellow corn area hectarage tolerant genes. grew at an annual average of 5.48 %, while white corn hectarage declined annually by 0.63 percent. Yellow corn yield grew annually by 3.94%, while that of white Yellow corn is preferred over white corn as feeds corn grew annually by 1.79 percent. (Tables 4 and 5) because of its high protein content compared to white corn. The country also has traditional varieties of yellow Productivity per hectare for yellow corn between 2000 corn including red/violet corn.9 10 and 2009 was 0.88 MT per hectare while that of white corn was 0.45 MT per hectare. Yellow corn productivity Demand for yellow corn grew albeit slightly in 20011 from 2009 by 0.14 MT per hectare while productivity for white corn was only 0.02 Yellow corn production is significant to the country’s MT per hectare. agricultural sector as it is a major ingredient for feeds utilized by the country’s livestock and poultry sectors, White corn is considered the country’s secondary staple. It is milled into grits, which are boiled together with rice or separately. Corn grits or kalimbugas are preferred over rice in many places as Cebu, Samar, Leyte, and parts of Mindanao.6

Before the introduction of OPVs and yellow hybrid corn, corn grits was the staple for as many as 20% of the population, but this has dwindled since the 1990s. In 2010, the share of net food disposable for corn was 12.5 percent.7 (Table 6)

Yellow corn on the other hand is largely used and traded as raw material for animal feeds or as feed crop. Almost 70% of national production of yellow corn is used for feeds. The rest is used for food processing (oil, starch, snacks) and ethanol manufacturing.8 (Table 7) White corn or kalimbugas as an alternative staple to rice.

12 II. GM Corn Commercialization MASIPAG

Table 4. Average Growth (in %) in Corn Hectarage, 1970-2010 Area Harvested 2009/2010 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 2000-2009 1970-2009 White (4.56) 3.18 0 (4.77) (0.93) (0.63) Yellow (9.44) 6.14 10.84 0.84 3.43 5.48 All Corn (6.89) 3.36 1.55 (3.03) 0.70 0.65 Source: Bureau of Agricultural Statistics

Table 5. Average Growth (in %) in Corn Yield (metric ton / hectare), 1970-2010 Yield/hectare 2009/2010 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 2000-2009 1970-2009 White 1.89 1.87 1.28 0.59 3.43 1.79 Yellow 1.51 1.41 6.25 5.21 2.87 3.94 All Corn (2.64) 1.72 2.52 3.59 4.37 3.05 Source: Bureau of Agricultural Statistics

Table 6. Rice and Corn Net Food Disposable (NFD) and Per Capita NFD Rice Corn Yield/hectare Share of Corn /a NFD (‘000 mt) Per Capita NFD (kg/yr) NFD (‘000 mt) Per Capita NFD (kg/yr) 1991 5,263 83.71 1,059 16.84 16.8 2001 7,892 103.16 1,421 18.57 15.3 2010 10,601 112.76 1,520 16.17 12.5 Source: Bureau of Agricultural Statistics

Table 7. Corn Supply and Demand Volume (‘000 MT) ITEM 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 TOTAL SUPPLY 5,800 6,016 6,146 6,213 6,387 7,227 7,711 7,815 8,669 7,689 8,295 Beginning Stock 190 177 236 211 192 204 177 173 198 254 153 Production 4,525 4,319 4,615 5,413 5,253 6,082 6,737 6,928 7,034 6,377 6,971 Imports 1,085 1,520 1,295 589 942 941 797 714 1,437 1,058 1,171 Corn Imports 172 278 99 23 71 307 152 23 310 96 91 Corn Substitute* 913 1,242 1,196 566 871 634 645 691 1,127 962 1,080 REQUIREMENT 5,623 5,784 5,935 6,022 6,183 7,049 7,539 7,617 8,415 7,536 7,484 Food 943 966 989 944 966 1,317 1,564 1,445 1,821 1,488 1,564 Seeds 50 48 48 51 49 51 53 53 54 50 52 Feeds 3,725 3,906 3,975 3,944 4,117 4,465 4,575 4,733 4,791 4,876 4,440 Wastes & Others** 905 864 923 1,083 1,051 1,216 1,347 1,386 1,749 1,122 1,428 ENDING STOCK 177 232 211 191 204 178 172 198 254 153 811 *Implied/assumed wheat/other corn substitutes used as feeds in corn equivalent **Includes industrial uses Source: Bureau of Agricultural Statistics, Livestock Development Corporation, Philippine Association of Feedmillers, Inc.

13 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

including fishery, as fish feeds. Increasing demand GM corn propagation in the livestock (particularly hog/swine) and poultry sectors translates to an increased demand for yellow Since the official commercialization of Bt corn and the corn. Yellow corn constitutes about 50% of the volume succeeding GM corn varieties developed, planted area of poultry feed and 40% of hog feed. has expanded from only 10,769 has. in 2003 to 685,317 has. in 2011. This is equivalent to an annual average The corn-livestock-poultry integrated industries increase of 84,319 hectares from 2003 to 2011. In 2010, contributed Php335.48 billion or 26.95% of GVA to the total GM corn area accounted for roughly 22% of corn Agriculture, Fishery and Forestry (AFF) sector in 2011 areas, compared to the 12% share in 2009. In 2011, at current prices. (Table 8) this increased further to 26.93% of total corn areas. It is also important to note that the stacked variety has Government data show that local production of yellow outpaced the single trait variety (Table 10). corn however has not been enough to supply and satisfy the demand for animal feeds in the country. GM corn production however is not quantified in the The country has been importing substantial volumes government data. Data shows only aggregate data of yellow corn and feed wheat, which is considered as of hybrid yellow corn production where GM corn is cheaper substitute for yellow corn, to fill in the deficit lumped together with non-GM hybrid yellow corn. in local production which in the last 10 years from Annual hybrid yellow corn production is at 3.6 to 4.2 2001 to 2010 averaged 31%. (See Table 9) Production MMT with an average yield of 3.85 to 4.06 tons per for feeds has been erratic over the last decade owing hectare from 2010 to 2011 respectively (Table 11).12 to the recent abnormal weather patterns attributed to climate change. It was only in 2011 that the country Isabela ranks first in yellow corn production with experienced a surplus in the local supply of yellow 1.02MMT production for 2011 or 21.24% of total in corn for feeds.11 2011. Maguindanao, on the other hand is number one in white corn producing with 425,741MT or 19.8% of Another GM corn developed after the Bt corn was total. (Table 12) Monsanto’s herbicide resistant (Roundup Ready) corn. Later on, Monsanto developed the stacked trait of Bt When it comes to GM corn area planted, Isabela leads and Roundup herbicide resistance. (See Box 2) with 237,954.5 ha in 2011 or roughly 35% of total GM corn areas in the Philippines. The top 10 GM corn

Table 8. Gross Value Added (GVA) in Agriculture, Fishery and Forestry, 2010-2011 CURRENT PRICES (In Billion Php) CONSTANT PRICES (In Billion Php) Industry Group 2010 2011 % Growth % Share to GVA 2010 2011 % Growth % Share to GVA 1. AGRICULTURE 1,106.28 1,240.64 12.14 99.68 659.99 675.79 2.39 99.38 a. Agriculture 926.15 1,057.20 14.15 84.95 523.56 544.82 4.06 80.12 Palay 221.14 243.60 10.11 19.57 122.97 130.25 5.92 19.15 Corn 60.58 76.65 26.51 6.16 34.59 37.88 9.50 5.57 Coconut 76.86 117.71 53.16 9.46 29.90 29.31 -1.98 4.31 Sugarcane 27.35 38.29 40.01 3.08 11.41 18.22 59.72 2.68 Cassava 12.10 14.32 18.29 1.15 7.87 8.26 5.06 1.22 Other Crops 202.14 225.66 11.63 18.13 110.75 108.98 -1.60 16.03 Livestock 150.33 152.00 1.11 12.21 90.48 92.26 1.96 13.57 Poultry 101.85 106.83 4.89 8.58 68.26 71.26 4.40 10.48 Activities & Services 73.71 82.15 11.45 6.60 47.35 48.41 2.24 7.12 b. FISHERY 180.14 183.44 1.83 14.74 136.43 130.97 -4.00 19.26 2. FORESTRY 2.44 3.93 61.52 0.32 2.68 4.20 57.10 0.62 GVA in Agriculture, 1,108.72 1,244.57 12.25 100.00 662.67 680.00 2.62 100.00 Fishery & Forestry Source: National Statistics Coordinating Board

14 II. GM Corn Commercialization MASIPAG

Table 9. Feed Grains: Supply and Demand, 2001-2011 Volume (‘000 MT) Self Sufficiency YEAR Local Demand (a) Local Supply (b) Yellow Corn Import Feed Wheat Import (a/b) 2001 3,725 2,216 172 913 59 2002 3,906 2,144 278 1,242 55 2003 3,975 2,178 99 1,196 55 2004 3,944 2,708 23 566 69 2005 4,117 2,551 71 871 62 2006 4,465 3,163 307 634 71 2007 4,575 3,578 152 645 78 2008 4,733 3,972 23 691 84 2009 4,791 4,010 310 1,127 84 2010 4,876 3,431 96 962 70 2011 4,440 4,821 91 1,200 109 Source: Bureau of Agricultural Statistics, Livestock Development Corporation, Philippine Association of Feedmillers, Inc.

Box 2: Bacillus thuringensis and Roundup Herbicide The Bt pesticide comes from the soil bacteria - Bacillus thuringensis that creates a lethal poison Bt-toxin which kills specific insects. In its natural form, it is used in organic and conventional agriculture and forestry. Scientists take the bacterial gene, make changes so it will work in plants, and then put it into plant DNA so that every cell of the plant creates the toxin. Also, the natural BT pesticide molecule has a safety catch on it, keeping it inactive. Once it gets inside an alkaline stomach of the Asiatic Corn Borer (or any insect sensitive to the Bt toxin), the safety catch is removed and it then destroys the stomach lining of the pest and kills it. When scientists prepare the Bt gene for plants, however, they change it so the molecule no longer has the safety catch. It is immediately active. The Bt gene is also incorporated in eggplant and rice targeted for commercialization by 2013.

The foreign genes of the Roundup ready crops to survive herbicide spraying (with glyphosate as the active ingredient) come from the Petunia flower or from Agrobacterium sp., which naturally overproduces the element responsible for the herbicide action. In the field, while the weeds and other plants are killed by the herbicide, Roundup Ready crops stay unaffected by constantly producing the herbicide-tolerant protein. Other than GM corn, GM cotton and GM soybeans are also resistant to Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide.

Source: MASIPAG 2003; Michael Hansen, 2012.

Examples of GM corn seed bags. The Dekalb brand shows 2 logos featuring the Corn Borer Protection and the Roundup Ready trait. This states that the seed releases Bt toxins against pest and is also able to resist glyphosate application to control weeds (stacked trait variety).

15 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 10. Total Area Planted to GM Corn, Philippines 2003-2011 (in hectares) YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Bt Corn 10,769 59,756 50,009 96,800 122,593 81,652 48,023 40,235 21,007 RR Corn 26,493 120,023 51,485 46,809 8,690 15,038 Stacked (Bt + RR) 4,580 71,279 214,438 232,395 493,598 643,808 Pyramided 5,464 Total GM Area 10,769 59,756 50,009 127,873 313,895 347,575 327,227 542,523 685,317 All Corn Area 2,409,808 2,527,135 2,441,788 2,570,673 2,648,317 2,661,021 2,683,890 2,499,050 2,544,612 % GM Area 0.45 2.36 2.05 4.97 11.85 13.06 12.19 21.71 26.93 Source: Bureau of Plant Industry

Pioneer signage are placed near roads to attract farmers to use their products.

16 II. GM Corn Commercialization MASIPAG

Table 11. Annual Philippine Corn Production, 2010 and 2011 2011 2010 PRODUCTION (mt) 6,971,221 6,376,796 Hybrid 4,390,780 3,740,033 Modern OPV 1,375,881 1,456,867 Native OPV 1,204,560 1,179,896 White 2,150,222 2,169,103 Hybrid 114,775 119,549 Modern OPV 927,180 957,445 Native OPV 1,108,267 1,092,109 Yellow 4,820,999 4,207,693 Hybrid 4,276,005 3,620,484 Modern OPV 448,701 499,422 Native OPV 96,293 87,787 AREA HRVSTD (ha) 2,544,612 2,499,040 Hybrid 1,096,355 985,509 Modern OPV 655,589 704,253 Native OPV 792,668 809,278 White 1,283,701 1,338,943 Hybrid 43,432 46,271 Modern OPV 490,116 519,589 Native OPV 750,153 773,083 Yellow 1,260,911 1,160,097 Hybrid 1,052,923 939,238 Modern OPV 165,473 184,664 Native OPV 42,515 36,195 YIELD/HECTARE (mt/ha) 2.74 2.55 Hybrid 4 3.8 Modern OPV 2.1 2.07 Native OPV 1.52 1.46 White 1.68 1.62 Hybrid 2.64 2.58 Modern OPV 1.89 1.84 Native OPV 1.48 1.41 Yellow 3.82 3.63 Hybrid 4.06 3.85 Modern OPV 2.71 2.7 Native OPV 2.26 2.43 Source: Bureau of Agricultural Statistics

17 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 12. Top Ten Corn Producing Provinces, 2011 Yellow Corn Volume (MT) % Share White Corn Volume (MT) % Share Rank Philippines 4,820,999 100.00 Philippines 2,150,222 100.00 1 Isabela 1,024,186 21.24 Maguindanao 425,741 19.80 2 Bukidnon 761,951 15.80 Lanao del Sur 219,302 10.20 3 South Cotabato 370,427 7.68 Lanao del Norte 200,561 9.33 4 Cagayan 345,981 7.18 Zamboanga del Sur 101,710 4.73 5 North Cotabato 301,515 6.25 Cebu 94,734 4.41 6 Pangasinan 227,948 4.73 North Cotabato 78,432 3.65 7 Sultan Kudarat 175,306 3.64 Sarangani 65,451 3.04 8 Iloilo 138,454 2.87 Negros Oriental 63,398 2.95 9 Quirino 120,274 2.49 South Cotabato 58,291 2.71 10 Camarines Sur 117,484 2.44 Misamis Oriental 55,178 2.57 Source: Bureau of Agricultural Statistics

Table 13. Top Ten Provinces with Biggest Areas Better income? Planted with GM Corn, 2011 (in hectares) The Philippine government considers the wide-scale Province Area propagation of GM corn in the country as an indication Isabela 237,954.5 of its success and projected benefits to the economy, Cagayan 58,516.0 the smallholder corn farmers, and the environment. Pangasinan 53,856.0 As such, it is targeting to increase the GM corn area by 200,000 ha in 2016.14 Bukidnon 39,720.0 North Cotabato 38,160.0 The US Department of Agriculture-Foreign Agricultural Sultan Kudarat 32,375.0 Service (USDA-FAS) estimates the number of Filipino Quirino 21,842.0 smallholder corn farmers (average of two hectares) Ifugao 19,567.0 at 270,000 in 2010. The USDA estimates farm level economic gains from GM corn production in the Tarlac 19,011.5 period 2003 to 2009 at US$108 million (Php 4.4B), South Cotabato 17,470.0 and at US$35 million (Php 1.4B) in 2009 alone.15 Cost Sub-total 536,099.0 production and value chain analysis in major corn Others 149,518.5 producing regions also estimates income gains for farmers from Php20,000 to Php50,000 per hectare.16 Total 685,617.5 (Tables 14 and 15) The DA meanwhile estimates an Source: Bureau of Plant Industry additional income from planting GM corn from 1996 to 2009 of over roughly one million hectares, translating provinces comprise 78.2% of total GM corn areas in the to Php4 billion for 125,000 smallholder farmers.17 country. Except for Camarines Sur and Iloilo, eight of the top yellow corn producers in the country are also Other studies report that profit gains at the farm level the top 10 GM corn producing provinces. (Table 13) are computed at Php10,132 (about US$180) per hectare for farmers planting Bt corn with a corresponding The rapid expansion of GM corn area placed the savings of Php168 (about US$3) per hectare in country in the 13th position of ‘mega-producers’ of insecticide costs. In another socio-economic impact GM crops in the world. (Figure 3) Globally, total area study, it was reported that the additional farm income planted to GM crops reached 148 million hectares in from Bt corn was Php7,482 (about US$135) per hectare 2010 by an estimated 15.4 million farmers from the 29 during the dry season and Php7,080 (about US$125) countries propagating GM crops. per hectare during the wet season of the 2003-2004 crop year. Using data from the 2004-2005 crop year, it was determined that Bt corn could provide an overall

18 II. GM Corn Commercialization MASIPAG

Figure 3.

Farmers take a rest under the shade after harvesting corn.

19 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 14. Estimated Cost and Returns of GM Corn Production, Region XII Inputs Logistics Process Harvesting Logistics 4 bags 18-46-0 900 3,600 Per bag 20 80 Plowing and furrowing 3,000 Shelling 1,200 Transportation Fee at 2,500 P0.50/kg x 5,000) 4 bags 46-0-0 1,780 7,120 Per bag 20 80 Harrowing 3,000 Drying 1,200 Informal fees 0.02 2 bags 0-0-60 1,600 3,200 Per bag 20 40 Planting, Basal Application 1,500 Bagging/Filling 1,200 Seeds 9,000 Per bag 10 10 Herbicide Application 250 Pesticides/Herbicides 1,100 Off Barring 1,000 100pcs sacks 20 2,000 General Weeding 500 1 roll twine 80 80 Side Dressing 500 Hilling-up 1,200 Insecticide Application 300 Harvesting 2,000 Hauling 1,000

Total Cost 26,100 210 14,250 3,600 2,500 Cost/kg 5.22 0.04 2.85 0.72 0.50 % to total 56% 0.45% 31% 8% 5% Target average yield = 5.00 MT per hectare TOTAL COST/KG 9.33 TOTAL PRODUCTION 46,660.00 COST GROSS INCOME 68,500.00 NET INCOME 21,840 ROI 46.81% Source: Region XII, Department of Agriculture Regional Field Unit

income advantage that ranged from 5-14% during Based on the study done recently by Brooke and the wet season and 20-48% during the dry season. In Barfoot in 2011, the planting of GM crops from 1996 to a more recent study covering crop year 2007-2008, 2009 amounted to the sequestration of CO2 emissions biotech corn increased average net profitability in nine equivalent to the CO2 emissions of 7.853 million provinces by between 4 and 7% during the wet season cars. Also according to the study, pesticide spraying and between 3 and 9% during the dry season.18 was reduced by 393 Million kilograms and as a result decreased the environmental impact associated with Improved environment? chemicals use on the area planted to biotech crops by 17.1 percent. Without biotechnology, the report Further to the benefits of planting GM corn, notes, maintaining global production at the 2009 level proponents claim that Bt corn reduces the application would have needed an additional 3.8 million hectares of insecticide and reduces exposure of farmers to of soybeans, 5.6 million hectares of corn, 2.6 million harmful chemicals. Likewise, the propagation of Bt hectares of cotton, and 0.3 million hectare of canola. corn and its stacked traits is said to reduce exposure The total area requirement would be about 7% of of non-target organisms to insecticide based on the arable land in the US or 24% of the arable land in observed incidence of more beneficial arthropods in Brazil.20 Bt corn field trials.19

20 II. GM Corn Commercialization MASIPAG

Table 15. Projected Production Cost and Returns for GM Corn in Malaybalay, Bukidnon COST ITEMS Qty Unit Unit Price Total Cost P/Kg PRODUCTION CATEGORY Expected Production = 6.0 MT/ha. A. Inputs 1. Seeds 2 bags 4,250 8,500 2. Fertilizers & Ameliorants * Complete (14-14-14) 4 bags 1,200 4,800 * Di-Ammo Phos (18-46-0) 3 bags 1,800 5,400 * Muriate of Potash (0-0-60) 1 bags 1,330 1,330 * Urea (46-0-0) * Ammophos (16-20-0) *17-7-0 * Chicken Manure (amortized for 4 cropping) 10 bags 100 1,000 * Lime (amortized for 4 croppings) 30 bags 30 900 3. Pesticides/weedicides/herbicides,etc. 1 bots. 1,000 1,000 B. Labor 1. Lime & manure spreading MD * 0 2. Planting 7 MD * 150 1,050 3 MAD ** 300 900 3. Hilling Up 2 MAD ** 300 600 4. Spraying 2 MD * 150 300 5. Off-barring 3 MAD ** 300 900 6. Fertilizing 5 MD * 150 750 7. Weeding 11 MD * 150 1,650 C. Machine/Equipment/Services/Facilities 1.Tractor (plowing) 1 passes 2,000 2,000 0.4 (harrowing) 1 Passes 2,000 2,000 2. Sprayer 0 3. Hauler bags 0 Sub-Total 33,080 II. POST PRODUCTION CATEGORY A. Inputs 1. Sacks (for corn in cobs, 2 uses) 300 pcs 10 3,000 0.6 Sacks ( for grains use, 2 uses) pcs 0 0 2. Twines 4 kg 50 200 0.04 B. Labor 1.Harvesting 12 MD * 150 1,800 2. In field hauling (either by tractor or manual labor) 300 Sacks 5 1,500 0.3 3. Hauling by piecework (2 moves) Kg 0 0 4. Shelling 120 Sacks 15 1,800 5. Drying 120 Sacks 5 600 C. Machine/Eqpt. Services/Facilities 1. Sheller Sacks 2. Solar Dryer Kgs 3. Truck Hauler (from farm to shelling/dryer area) Sacks D. Other Costs 1. Interest (18% pax 4 months ave.) ha. 2. Overhead & contingency ha. Sub-Total 8,900 GRAND TOTAL 41,980 7.00 RETURNS Sales 6,000 Kg 11.5 69,000 NET INCOME 27,020 4.50 ROI 64% * MD = man days * MAD = man and animal days Source: Region X Department of Agriculture Regional Field Unit

21 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Endnotes

1 James, Clive. “Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2010”. ISAAA Brief No. 42. Published by The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), copyright 2010, page 151 of 279 pages. Accessed at http://www.isaaa.org/resources/ publications/briefs/42/download/isaaa-brief-42-2010.pdf 2 Data based on 2nd cropping in 2010 from the Bureau of Agricultural Statistics online database. 3 Javier, Emil Q, ‘Corn Farming Systems Within the Context of the Philippine Agricultural Landscape’ in “Modern Biotechnology and Agriculture: A History of the Commercialization of Biotech Maize in the Philippines”, various authors, by STRIVE Foundation, Copyright 2009, page 70 of 258 pages. 4 Ibid. p. 74 5 Ibid., pp. 83-84 6 Ibid. p. 73 7 Key Informant Interview (KII), Mr. Milo de los Reyes, Head of the Secretariat of the Philippine Corn Program, Department of Agriculture, March 16, 2012 8 Industry Corn Development Roadmap 2011-2016, Department of Agriculture, Corn Sector 9 KII, Dr. Artemio Salazar, Ph.D., Institute of Plant Breeding, University of the Philippines, Los Baños, March 30, 2012 10 Focused group discussions with corn farmers in Visayas and Mindanao 11 Javier, Emil Q, 2009, op.cit., p. 76 of 258 pages. 12 The Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) is the DA line bureau that monitors all GM corn areas in the country. The Bureau of Agricultural Statistics (BAS) lumps together GM corn areas with hybrid corn areas in its data monitoring. Data presented is an approximation noting for a 10 hectare discrepancy in BAS and BPI data in Negros Occidental in 2011 where BPI data monitored 10 hectares of GM corn area in the province but which did not appear in BAS monitoring. 13 James, C. 2010, op.cit. p. 5 14 KII, Mr. Milo de los Reyes, March 16, 2012 15 James, C. 2010, op.cit. p. 148 16 Various interviews, Department of Agriculture Regional Farm Units VI, X, XII March 9, 19, and 26, 2012; Value chain analysis from the Corn Industry Reports of DA-RFU X and XII 17 DA-BPI, March 8, 2012, http//biotech.da.gov.ph/ 18 James, C., op.cit., p.154 19 Regulation of Genetically Modified Crops in the Philippines, March 8, 2012. DA-BPI accessed at http//biotech.da.gov.ph/ 20 Brookes, Graham and Barfoot, Peter. “GM crops: global socio-economic and environmental impacts 1996-2009”. April 2011, pages 17 of 173 pages. Accessed at www.pgeconomics.co.uk/pdf/2011globalimpactstudy.pdf. See also James, C., 2010.

22 III. GM corn: Benefitting TNC interests MASIPAG

III. GM corn: Benefitting TNC interests

MOs and the entire life sciences industry are a US$1.2 billion for GM cotton (11%), and US$0.3 billion huge TNC business. This is the reason for the for GM canola (3%). Gaggressiveness of corporations, governments and traders despite global evidences of negative Meanwhile, advanced industrialized countries led impacts on people’s livelihood, environment and by the US comprised 80% of the GM crop market, health. equivalent to US$8.9 billion. The rest, US$2.3 billion (20%), was accounted for by the underdeveloped Reaping profits countries. Meanwhile, the global trade in seeds is worth some US$15.3 billion in 2009, led by the Netherlands, Three decades ago, it was projected that biotechnology US and France. could bring in profits ranging from US$65 billion to US$100 billion by the 2000s. The highest projection was Further, the market value of the global biotech crop for agricultural products, followed by pharmaceuticals.1 market is based on the sale price of biotech seed plus any technology fees that apply. The accumulated In the annual report by the International Service for global value for the 15-year period, since biotech crops the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), were first commercialized in 1996, is estimated at the global market value of GM crops was about US$73.5 billion. (Table 16) US$11.2 billion in 2010, from US$10.6 billion in 2009. This accounted for 22% of the US$51.8 billion global By production and area, the US comprised crop protection market in 2010 and 33% of the approximately 50% of the total global GM crop area approximately US$34 billion commercial seed market. planted (cotton, soy and corn).2 The same report noted that the GM crop market comprised US$5.4 billion for GM corn (equivalent to In 2011, total area planted to GM crops reached 160 48% of total), US$4.3 billion for GM soybean (38%), million hectares globally. The global area planted to

23 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 16. Global Value of the Biotech Crop Table 17. Biotech Crop Area as Percent of Global Market, 1996 to 2010 Area of Principal Crops, 2010 (Million Hectares) Year Value (Millions of US$) Crop Global Area* Biotech Crop Biotech Area as 1996 93 Area % of Global Area 1997 591 Soybean 90 73.3 81 1998 1,560 Cotton 33 21 64 1999 2,354 Maize 158 46 29 2000 2,429 Canola 31 7 23 2001 2,928 Others - - 0.7 - - 2002 3,470 Total 312 148 47 2003 4,046 Source: Compiled by ISAAA, 2010. *Latest FAO 2007 hectarage 2004 5,090 2005 5,714 Table 18. Largest Seed, Biotech and 2006 6,670 Agrochemical Corporations, 2009 2007 7,773 Company Biotech Rank (% Agrochemical Rank (% Seed Sales market sales market 2008 9,045 (M US$) share) share) 2009 10,607 Monsanto 7,297 1 (27%) 4,427 4 (10%) 2010 11,219 Du Pont 4,641 1 (17%) 2,403 6 (5%) Total 73,589 Syngenta 2,564 3 (9%) 8,491 1 (19%) Source: Cropnosis, 2010, ISAAA 2010 Report Bayer 700 7 (3%) 7,544 2 (17%) Dow 635 8 (2%) 3,902 5 (9%) GMO crops has grown significantly over the years, BASF - - 5,007 3 (11%) comprising 47% of total planted area of the same Big 6 total 15,837 58% 31,744 71% crops in 2010 (Table 17). The area planted to GM Source: Who Will Control the Green Economy, ETC Communique No. 107, Nov crops is expected to increase with the imminent 2011 commercialization of Golden Rice by 2013.

Countries that gained the most economically (over the highest returns. Monsanto also got the top spot in US$1 billion) during the 14 years of commercialization the seed and biotech market. (Table 18). (1996 to 2009) were US (US$29.8 billion), Argentina (US$10.3 billion), China (US$9.3 billion), India (US$7.0 Agrochemical TNCs are able to control the rights over billion), Brazil (US$3.5 billion), Canada (US$2.6 billion), the seeds through patents. Laws have been created and others (US$2.1 billion) for a total of US$64.6 billion. to support TNC control over seeds. Global example of these enabling laws is International Union for the Meanwhile, the value of the harvested GMO grains Protection of New Varieties of Plants, which provides from GMO seeds was estimated at approximately full patent protection for the transgenic seeds US$150 billion globally in 2010, and projected to commercialized in the beginning of 1990s.3 increase by 10-15% annually. Patents prohibit farmers to save seeds, and violators Controlling seeds are penalized or even imprisoned in some cases. In the last 13 years from 1997 to 2010 for instance, Monsanto The ultimate beneficiaries of this global market for filed 144 lawsuits against American family farmers, GMOs are a handful of giant agrochemical TNCs, most with an additional 700 cases being settled out of court. of which are from the developed countries – the US, In 2007, Monsanto collected US$21 million damages EU, and Japan. In 2008, at the height of the global from small farmers and small farm businesses and food crisis, these TNCs managed to reap huge profits US$240,000 from the 10 cases it filed against Canadian reaching more than a billion dollars. Among the top six farmers.4 5 major agrochemical TNCs in 2009, Monsanto raked in

24 III. GM corn: Benefitting TNC interests MASIPAG

GM corn product information featuring guide in planting GM corn (Left photo), precaution and terms and conditions in purchasing the product (Right photo). GM corn patents are being protected by the Plant Variety Protection Law which prevents the use/ reuse of the GM corn and its parental lines. The product info also states that the farmers should practice the Insect Resistance Management. This means that farmers should allot a buffer zone of non-GM corn as ‘refugia’ to prevent corn borer resistance to Bt corn. However, these procedures are not known to farmers, and if they do, they opt not to do it as it decreases the area allotted for GM corn and hence potential corn harvest.

Developed countries led by the EU and the US are pushing countries like the Philippines to adopt and To date, the top four pesticide firms currently control implement patent laws similar to theirs to be able 59% of the global market, and the top four seed to maximize their gains for ensuring TNC profit and firms control 56% of the global proprietary rights control. (copyrights, e.g., brand-name) seed market.8

Dominating the seeds market are Monsanto, DuPont Controlling food and agriculture and Syngenta. They increasingly forge networks among themselves and other smaller agrochemical Consolidation among the world’s largest TNCs in the corporations through agreements to cross-license agrochemical and pharmaceutical industries has transgenic seed traits. The commercialization of provided leverage over a few TNCs to monopolize full patent-protected GM seeds of corn which later and control the global agriculture and food chain. on expanded to other commodity seeds - such as Monsanto leads these TNCs as it is now the world‘s soybeans and cotton, contributed much to greater largest seed company mainly because of its patented consolidation of TNCs. transgenic seed technologies and acquisitions of biotechnology companies. Agrochemical TNCs also extended their patents protection over non-transgenic seeds. They have For instance, the major seed company Cargill sold its filed claims on traits identified through genomic international seed division to Monsanto and its North sequencing (marker assisted breeding), which has American seed division to AgrEvo (later acquired by encouraged consolidation among non-commodity Bayer) in 1998. Cargill and Monsanto then formed a focused seed companies, such as those specializing US$50 million joint venture called Renessen, which in fruits and vegetables. Eventually, the TNCs have allowed Cargill to obtain access to Monsanto‘s acquired or created joint ventures with more than two transgenic seeds and other inputs indirectly through hundred firms across the globe.7

25 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

the downstream grain collection and processing and drugs safety testing, which is at least three months aspects of food and animal feed production. The and on three mammalian species. The tests done alliance is one of several emerging “food chain clusters” on MON 863 for example have been done for only that increasingly control markets from the gene and one mammalian species. The same procedure was seed to the supermarket shelf.9 employed in the testing for MON810, which is the first GM corn propagated in the Philippines. Independent Companies of pharmaceutical and agrochemical studies recommend the application of the standard companies also took place to take advantage of period of testing on three mammalian species over potential collaboration in what is described as “life at least three weeks and employing larger sample sciences” industry, which is marked with numerous sizes over one to two years before commercialization mergers. Monsanto, for example, merged with especially on GM corn. Pharmacia and Upjohn before a new Monsanto division focusing on agriculture was completely On the other hand, peer-reviewed studies by scientists spun off. Syngenta resulted from a merger of the on GMOs primarily developed by Monsanto – GM agribusiness divisions of Novartis and Zeneca, but soybean, GM potato, GM corn – the most widely AstraZeneca, which focuses on pharmaceuticals, commercialized GM crops globally have been found remains a separate company. Bayer acquired the to have negative impact on the health of animals. agribusiness operations of Aventis (itself of merger The Bt toxin used in Bt corn for example has been of Hoechst, Schering and Rhone Poulenc), but found to affect the lower part of the small intestines Sanofi-Aventis is a financially distinct pharmaceutical of mice, which means that it survives digestion. Also, company. By 2009, six companies with chemical and/ the amino structure of the Bt toxin has a section that or pharmaceutical company roots remained dominant is identical to a known allergen. It fails the allergy tests in the seed industry. recommended by the WHO. 12

Another strategy by which TNCs control agriculture Another study revealed that Bt-toxin is found and the food chain and maximize profits is through circulating in the blood of North American adults and cross-licensing where TNCs agree on cooperative new-borns. Doctors at Sherbrooke University Hospital agreements. Cross-licensing agreements have in Quebec found it in the blood of pregnant women increased because of stacking multiple transgenic and their babies as well as in non-pregnant women. traits within a single seed (stacked varieties). Monsanto The study postulates that it was consumed in the and Dow (the latter has agreements with every firm normal diet of Canadians, including from eating meat except Bayer) for example jointly undertook efforts from animals fed with Bt corn, as most livestock are.13 in 2010 to commercialize a corn seed that has eight different transgenic traits (combinations of three traits Pest infestation on GM crops are also underreported are already in widespread use). 11 or suppressed. There are reports that the rootworm beetle has infested Bt corn farms in the US especially Suppressing information? corn farmers who have abandoned crop rotation either because they are cashing in on the high prices There are already a plethora of studies on the effects of corn or they have quotas to meet with bio-ethanol of GMOs on the environment and human health, plants. Farms infested with the rootworm beetle have but there is also a systemic effort especially from been increasing.14 agrochemical TNCs to downplay or even suppress findings. Meanwhile, host governments such as the What an increasingly concerned public is calling for Philippines, despite independent studies showing is for clinical studies on health impacts be prolonged the possible negative effects of GMOs, are going on and that tests be made compulsory and obligatory with propagation and commercialization, practically for all GMOs commercially cultivated. Results of ignoring the precautionary principle. Even the fact studies should also be made public. These procedures that Filipino farmers for instance are not informed on apparently have not been required for all GMOs the impacts that the GM seeds may bring violates the released in commercial scale across the globe. Despite principle of free, prior and informed consent. existing international protocols on biodiversity, IPRs, biotechnology, etc. and the emergence of new issues GMO proponents especially TNCs have devoted in corporate agriculture, advanced industrialized limited time for clinical tests of GMOs. Monsanto for countries led by the US and the EU have not complied. instance has not followed the standards for pesticides All these only prove the thesis right at the beginning

26 III. GM corn: Benefitting TNC interests MASIPAG of this study – that GMOs are actually about increasing field tested in their area. This is one of the reasons for corporate profits. the guidelines being not yet finalized after six years of being drafted. Seeds and agrochemical TNCs largely Influencing governments based in the US have much to lose should countries strictly enforce their biosafety guidelines. Aside from investing billions of dollars in research and technology that would produce profitable TNCs are now looking at profitable prospects of technologies for them, TNCs also pour in billions of propagating GM rice. Rice is grown in 251 million dollars to gain institutional support. They establish farms in over 156.7 million hectares. It is consumed by lobby groups to participate in international and local 3 billion people based largely in Asia where more than campaigns that would incorporate their products and 90% of global rice is produced and consumed. Also, technologies as part of the “solutions” to poverty and the top three US-based TNCs – Cargill, Archer Daniels hunger. Midland and Bunge – are actively lobbying for the complete liberalization of rice trade under the WTO. Monsanto has also been known to sponsor journalists, Should this happen, rice traded in the world market legislators or policy makers, and farmers to visit their would expand from 7 to 15 percent. headquarters in St. Louis, Missouri in an attempt to convince them of the ‘benefits’ of GMOs. So-called Alienating the farmers farmers’ federations heralding the positive impacts of GMOs are suspected to have been organized by GM The long-term implication of seed manipulation proponents and are not truly representative of the through biotechnology is the alienation of the food majority of corn farmers, which are small-scale and producers from the seed. Through biotechnology, indigenous. seeds have been developed increasingly towards satisfying the thirst for more profits of agrochemical In the US for example the 50 largest agricultural and TNCs rather than food security. food patent-holding companies and two of the largest biotechnology and agrochemical trade associations Then, seeds have been developed to promote have spent more than US$572 million in campaign unsustainable agricultural farm practices such as contributions and lobbying expenditures since 1999. increasing amounts of inorganic farm chemicals used These companies and trade associations hire well- that deplete soil nutrients, poison ecosystems, destroy connected lobbying groups, including at least 13 biodiversity, and lead to soil erosion. Now, GM seeds former members of US Congress and over 300 former are packaged with herbicides and require volumes of congressional and White House staff, to promote fertilizers to attain the desired yields. genetically modified food and agricultural products.15 As TNCs profit from their monopoly over seeds, they Lobbyists for agrochemical TNCs in the US also worked also profit from the package of technologies that to prevent consumer labelling of GM foods, promote come along with the seeds. In 2009, the global crop genetically modified livestock and animals, and protection market amounted to US$50.8 billion. Sales prevent foreign governments from banning or limiting from pesticide protected plants or PPPs reached genetically modified crops and foods. In 2004, for US$10.6 billion. Herbicides which are packaged with instance, the lobby group BIO spent money on a bill PPPs were worth US$17.9 billion. that sought to promote biotechnology outside the US and a House resolution that sought to use the World All these led to reduced choices and decision-making Trade Organization (WTO) to force the EU to accept US by farmers. Around 15 million smallholder farmers biotech crops.16 from underdeveloped countries, who make up 90% of farmers in the world who planted GM crops in 2011, The main corporate advocacy is to skirt biosafety are now unable to save seeds and replant. Costs for responsibilities. In the Philippines, for instance, seeds producing food crops have increased over the decades and agrochemical TNCs led by Monsanto are into the with the introduction of GM seeds while farmers’ advocacy against empowering government agencies incomes have decreased. Planting GM crops has also and the affected communities in the monitoring encouraged monocropping and veered farmers away and implementation of the biosafety guidelines and from diversifying their crops. ensuring balanced information on the GMOs being

27 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Endnotes

1 UNCTAD, 1988 op.cit, page 17. 2 The USDA Economic Research Service reports that 80-90% of all corn, soy, and cotton grown in the United States is GMO. See James, Clive. 2010. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2010. ISAAA Brief No. 42. Published by The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), copyright 2010, page 222 of 279 pages. Accessed at http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/42/download/isaaa- brief-42-2010.pdf 3 Howard, Philip H. ‘Visualizing Consolidation in the Global Seed Industry: 1996–2008’, in “Sustainability 2009”. 1, 1266-1287; doi:10.3390/su1041266. Accessed at www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability 4 Barrett, Mike. “Judge Throws Out Organic Farmers’ Recent Case Against Monsanto”. Accessed at http:// naturalsociety.com/judge-throws-out-organic-farmers-recent-case-against-monsanto/ 5 Andrews, Kurtis and De Beer, Jeremy. “Accounting of Profits to Remedy Biotechnology Patent Infringement”. Published 2010, Osgoode Hall Law Journal. Page 639, accessed at http://ohlj.ca/english/documents/47-4_DeBeer- FINAL.pdf 6 Howard, P. H., 2009, loc. cit. 7 Ibid. 8 A rough guideline developed by economists is that when four firms control 40% of a market, it is no longer competitive, Ibid. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid. 11 Ibid. 12 Quijano, Romeo F., M.D. “Health Risks of Genetically Modified Food”. Powerpoint presentation. 13 Ibid. 14 Thornhill, Ted. The billion-dollar pest: U.S. beetle is developing resistance to one of the most widely used genetically modified crops, say scientists 15 “Food and Agriculture Biotechnology Industry Spends More Than Half a Billion Dollars to Influence Congress”. Issue Brief, November 2010, accessed at www.foodandwaterwatch.org 16 Ibid.

28 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

IV. Evidence from the Ground

his study aims to assess the socio-economic in the field research. For the FGDs, corn farmers who impact of GM corn, including health, experienced planting GM corn in the last 10 years Tenvironmental and food security concerns and were selected to provide their first-hand experience looking into the various actors such as the TNCs, in planting GM corn. Barangay officials who are also landlords, traders, local government, and scientists. GM corn farmers also participated in a number of the FGDs conducted. KIIs were also conducted for peasant The case areas leaders, barangay officials, local government unit (LGU) officials, municipal agriculturists, and regional officials The study was conducted from February to March 2012. Impact research was done in 12 barangays in seven GM corn producing provinces in Luzon (4), Visayas (4) and Mindanao (4). (see Appendix 1)

Isabela, Pangasinan, Bukidnon, Sultan Kudarat, and South Cotabato belong to the top 10 corn producing provinces in the country with Isabela comprising 34% of the total hectarage of GM corn areas in the Philippines.

Methods

The research was a combination of desk research and Interview with DAGAMI peasant leader Diony Yadao as he relates how field research. Focused group discussion (FGD) and the life and livelihood of Isabela changed in the introduction of GM corn key informant interview (KII) methods were utilized in their farms.

29 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 19. Economic Profile of the Research Communities Case Areas Average farm size and Household / Irrigation/other and No. of FGD Major sources of livelihood ownership of land Production technology population agricultural services Participants (hectares) Villa Rey, Echague, 412 population 78.41% engaged in farming; 1 ha to 4 has; small-holder 3 hand tractors; 7 Rainfed Isabela (24) employed work is 18.18%; corn is the farmers; no titles to land – threshers; multi-purpose primary crop, palay is secondary crop. forestland drying pavement Vegetables, poultry Caquilingan, ~1,000 HHs 60% of families engaged in farming; 1 to 2 ha; land under contest Farm animals, thresher, Rainfed Cordon, Isabela 40% are seasonal workers; 30% farm tractors (18) laborers. Banaban, 1,634 Farming is primary source of income. Only 5-10% own lands. 90% Farm animals, thresher, Rainfed; shallow tube Bayambang, population Corn and palay are primary crops. farmworkers of which, 50% are tractors wells Pangasinan (12) Mungbean and other tubers are also either tenants or leaseholders. planted. Land rent is 12-20 cavans per palay cropping. In some cases, tenants pay as rent 5 sacks of palay and 20% of their total profit from planting corn. Macayo-cayo, Farming is primary source of income. ½ ha as most of the lands 10 hand tractors and two Rainfed; shallow tube Bayambang, Corn and palay are primary crops; have been distributed and ‘baby’ tractors; each HH wells Pangasinan (13) mungbeans, tomatoes, bittermelon sub-divided among family has its own plow. and eggplant. Almost all households members through P.D. 27; 70% have their own backyard livestock and of farmers own their lands, 30% poultry. Rope making is secondary farmworkers livelihood where 70% of HHs are involved. San Nicolas, San 138 HHs 90% are farmers. Corn is primary crop 10% are farm workers and the 30% of the farmers own Rainfed Dionisio, Iloilo (9) and rice is secondary crop. Vegetables rest are small-holder farmers. carabao and plow and only are also planted. About 10% of the small-holder eight own cows. Only one farmers lease their lands. The farmer owns a thresher. average size of farms is one to All farmers have native 1.5 ha; 300 square meters is the chickens, 90% have ducks, smallest while the biggest is 40% maintains backyard two hectares. swine, while 30% have goats. Quinabonglan, 188 HHs Farming is primary livelihood. In 1 to 3 ha with the majority 20 with corn thresher Rainfed Maayon, Capiz Sitio Mabonoligon Proper, 90% are owning 3 has – titled and with at Bgy level; 7 in Sitio farmers. Small-scale mining / gold CLOA. The rest are tenants (7:1 Proper; rice thresher is panning is secondary livelihood sharing in favor of the tenant; 15 at Bgy level while 6 at or Php1,500-2,000 per crop, per Sitio Proper. Most families hectare); farm workers make up have their own carabaos 5% of the farming community but have sold them in exchange of motorcycles for transportation Carataya, Cuartero, 1,313 About 8,000 hectares. Farming is Most farmers own a hectare Hand tractor – 11; Corn Rainfed Capiz (17) population ; main source of livelihood. All farmers of land. 30% of the farmers sheller – 7; Rice thresher 315 HHs; In plant corn mostly in the uplands/ own their farmlands while the – 8 Carataya Proper, hilly portions which comprises 50% of majority, 70% are tenants. there are at Carataya’s land area, palay is 20% of Farmworkers comprise 15% of least 25 HHs the land area. Forest lands comprise the total farmer population. about 10% while the rest, 20% comprise the homelots and vacant cogonal areas.

30 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

Halapitan, 8,295 – Farming is primary source of income 1 ha, 90% are small-holder 90% own carabao; 4 Rainfed San Fernando, population; for 85% of the population. 80% are farmers; some lease their lands; tractors, 10 baby tractors; Bukidnon (14) 1,708 HHs corn farmers. <10% are tenants. (as per bgy 15 corn shellers; 10 profile), average land holding shellers per family is 4.25 hectares. Mindagat, 2,192 Farming is the primary source of 1 ha to 3 has 4 threshers, 6 solar dryers, Mostly rainfed Malitbog, population, 408 income. Corn, rice and banana are 1 corn sheller, 1 rice and with about 11 has. Bukidnon (16) HHs primary crops. corn mill; sickle 720, bolo irrigated through knife 419, purok (bolo knife farmers’ initiative; used for cutting grass) 420 seed subsidies. An agricultural technologists visit the area twice a week while the veterenarian / livestock technician visits only as needed. Cinco, Banga, 5,782 (2007) Farming is primary source of income, 1 to 2 ha; 10% own lands; 20% One tractor; about 60% Rainfed; some irrigated; South Cotabato (8) population, 70% are farmers. Considered as corn are tenants; 70% farmworkers. has baby tractor (kuliglig); NABCOR corn drying 1,249 HHs capital of the Philippines and turnip 70% own carabaos – and milling facility capital of South Cotabato mostly the farmworkers. South Sepaka, 500 HHs Farming is primary source of income, 1 to 2 ha, about 30% are small- Carabao instead of tractors Rainfed Bagumbayan, 100% are into farming. holder farmers, 70% are under are utilized. Tractor, 1; baby Sultan Kudarat leaseholders re 15% of total tractor, 2; thresher, 2; corn (formerly part of harvest. 70% are farmworkers sheller, 1 Sto Niño, South Cotabato) (12) Focused Group Discussions, February to March 2012

Table 20. GM Corn Areas Planted in Case Provinces, 2011 (hectares) Rank Island/Province Bt RR Stacked Pyramided All Luzon 1 Isabela 5,395 994 231,027 538 237,954 3 Pangasinan 6,892 - 46,854 110 53,856 Visayas 18 Capiz - 301 6,511 436 7,248 12 Iloilo - 499 10,484 486 11,469 Mindanao 4 Bukidnon 1 3,632 36,087 - 39,720 9 South Cotabato 722 - 16,748 - 17,470 6 Sultan Kudarat 466 150 31,759 - 32,375 Source: Bureau of Plant Industry

31 Padpad or the manual removal of corn kernels from the cob is still beingSocio-economic done in the province Impacts of Capiz. of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

32 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG of the DA, including key national government offices Based on interviews with the barangay officials, and quasi-government agencies as well as private biotech sales agents would normally pay courtesy calls associations linked to the corn sector. to them and ask for assistance in gathering the farmers for the routine consultation. In these consultations, A total of 166 farmers participated in the FGDs agents would give out tokens such as towels and in all case areas. There were 35 local government T-shirts bearing their company’s name, raffle out gifts officials, including the regional offices of the DA, such as seeds and herbicides, and provide food for the provincial and municipal agriculture offices and 16 attending farmers. In some cases, agents would go national government officials and staff interviewed, directly to the farmers. including 17 peasant leaders, three seed growers, two representatives (local staff and national officer) Municipal Agriculture Officers (MAO) interviewed also of the government owned and controlled corporation affirmed this. According to them, biotech sales agents National Agribusiness Corporation (NABCOR), and one went to them at the beginning but later on went straight from the private group Philippine Association of Feed to the barangays. The MAO of Cuartero, Capiz does not Millers Incorporated (PAFMI). (See Appendix 2) concur with the current process. He says that, “there should be procedural process to create accountability Majority of the farmer-participants are smallholder on the impact of the GM corn and other GMOs that tenants and leaseholders. Except for farmer would be promoted later on” in his jurisdiction. respondents from Echague and Cordon, all FGD participants are beneficiaries of the government’s land With the fast introduction of different GM corn in reform programs under Presidential Decree No. 27 and villages and communities, knowledge about the corn the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). varieties being planted is also lacking or incomplete. The MAO in Maayon, Capiz said she is not aware of GM corn introduction any GM corn being planted in Maayon, claiming that Bt corn had been banned in Maayon. She said that Before the farmers were introduced to the GM Corn what are being planted are hybrid varieties. Barangay varieties, they used to plant traditional white corn, officials of Quinabonglan, Maayon however are aware improved open pollinated varieties and conventional of GM corn propagation in their area. hybrid corn. Corn brand naming is also a very important marketing The earliest time that farmers started planting GM corn strategy by the companies. When the farmers were was in 2003, as in the cases of Bgys. Carataya and Cinco. asked if they were aware that what they were planting Farmers from Dumarao, and San Dionisio as well as in was GM corn or if they even know what GMO means, Cordon and Echague started planting GM corn only in majority of the farmers said that they were only told it the mid-2000s. In Bgy. Banaban, corn farmers shifted to was hybrid corn. They only knew that Bt corn was the GM corn only in 2009. The same is true for Bgy. Mindagat. one they should avoid, which they knew were widely protested in the early 2000s. Corn seed sacks were not GM corn was introduced to the farmers through labeled Bt corn or GM corn, but only states that it is biotech sales agents of Monsanto, Syngenta and hybrid corn with corn borer protection, resistant to a Pioneer, much like the same way they were introduced specific herbicide or both. to the conventional hybrid varieties of corn. Agents usually come in right after harvest to introduce new For example, when agents introduced Roundup Ready seed varieties of the GM corn along with the chemicals (RR) corn, farmers were only informed of the presumed packaged with the seeds. reduction of cost, particularly labor and days of waiting from weeding out the farms to planting. Agents also visit traders and ask them to promote their corn brand. Farmers pointed out that the traders who Apparently, information about the possible effects on also serve as their main financiers or lenders introduced health of GM corn is also lacking. Asked if the agents and recommended to them which brand of GM corn told them that the GM corn should not be eaten and they will plant. In the case of Macayo-cayo and South elaborated on its possible side effects, the farmers Sepaka, farmers said they were the ones who chose had mixed responses. In Echague, only the agent to plant the GM corn based on the stories they heard from Syngenta informed the farmers that the GM corn from nearby barangays and other corn farmers. should not be eaten as they may experience stomach pains and diarrhea.

33 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 21. Timeline of GM Corn Introduction to farmers in the case areas Case Areas Varieties Planted Before GM corn Introduction of GM corn and Varieties Adopted Villa Rey, Echague, Until the 1980s, the place was still thickly forested and farmers In the mid-2000s, farmers started planting Bt and Round-up Ready Isabela practiced slash and burn (kaingin), clearing lands for settlement and Corn. During this period, there were only a few vegetables, banana farming. They planted rice, banana, cassava, and traditional white and some rice fields cultivated alongside corn production. corn. In the 1990s, hybrid corn was introduced, such as San Miguel Corporation (SMC) corn varieties, Ayala Seed, Cornworld, Cargill, and Pioneer. Vegetables such as squash, tomatoes, bittermelon, peanuts and watermelon were also planted. Caquilingan, Cordon, From the 1980s until 2004, hybrid yellow corn planted were SMC, From 2004 up to present, farmers plant GM corn varieties such as Isabela Cargill, Dekalb 818 (conventional), Cornworld, GSI – ordinary yellow Dekalb 818 RRC2, Bioseed and other Dekalb GM varieties. Dekalb and Bioseed. 9132 according to farmers is the most expensive GM corn brand. Banaban, Bayambang, Farmers used to plant traditional white and red corn in the 1970s. Dekalb 818 YG of Monsanto was introduced by traders in 2004. Pangasinan The open-pollinated-variety Silangan yellow corn was planted from 1980 onwards. Hybrid yellow corn was introduced in the 1990s by San Miguel Corporation and Cargill. Macayo-cayo, Majority of farmers used to plant white corn from 1960s to 1980s GM corn was introduced in 2002. Now, farmers also plant Pioneer Bayambang, such as macapuno and haba-haba. In the 1980s, silangan red corn 30T80 (stacked-trait), 30Y80 and Dekalb 818 YG. Pangasinan was also introduced. San Nicolas, San Before 1978, farmers planted traditional rice (Tres Marias, Lubang, Bt Corn Yieldguard variety was banned in Iloilo in 2005. However in Dionisio, Iloilo Cotsiam) and corn varieties with vegetables. The river and rice farms 2006, Pioneer introduced hybrid corn with “Todo Proteksyon” logo were also abundant with fish. Corn varieties such as SMC HYV yellow without the Bt corn label, thus evading policy banning Bt corn. GM corn, Pioneer 888, and Cargill were introduced in 1984. corn propagation in Brgy San Nicolas started in 2006. They plant stacked varieties of GM corn specifically Pioneer 3482YR (stacked trait), Dekalb 9132, Dekalb 818 YG and RRC2. Quinabonglan, In the 1980s, farmers plant native rice (makan, tabukanon, malido) GM corn varieties introduced are Pioneer corn brands such as YR Maayon, Capiz and HYVs for own consumption. In 1983, SMC HYV yellow corn was varieties (stacked-trait), 30G80, 30T80 and 30Y80. They also plant introduced and later on replaced by Pioneer hybrid corn. In 2000, Monsanto corn varieties such as Dekalb 818 RRC2, 9132 and 878. Monsanto’s Dekalb 818 was introduced. Bioseed Healer 101 (stacked trait) corn varieties were planted in the uplands. Carataya, Cuartero, Rice production used to be the primary crop. Farmers used to plant Farmers were introduced to hybrid corn production only in 2000 Capiz traditional corn varieties such as Surati, Tinigib, Singapore, Blanket, when Quedancor offered the farmers loans at 2.5% to 3% interest. up until 1990s. Farmers say that these corn varieties do not need Later in 2002, technicians from seeds corporations Monsanto, Pioneer application of fertilizers. introduced the GM corn varieties. The farmers said that they were only told that the new corn varieties were certified hybrid seed variety and not genetically modified. Bungsuan, Dumarao, Before 1980s, farmers planted only native corn varieties such as In 2003, farmers started planting Dekalb 818 YG. In 2005, they started Capiz Surati, Rapunza, Santitik, Tinigib, Cebu, UPCAVar and Miracle. planting Dekalb 9132. Halapitan, San Farmers planted native corn varieties such as Red Horse (so-called Farmers now plant Dekalb 818 RRC2, Dekalb 878 and Pioneer corn Fernando, Bukidnon because corn kernels are yellow and red). variety 3645R. They also plant Bioseed corn variety Healer 101. Mindagat, Malitbog, Before 1990s, farmers planted native corn varieties such as Tiniguib In 2004, Bt Corn was introduced by Monsanto through demo farms. Bukidnon and Casida. In 1990, conventional hybrid corn varieties such as SMC Farmers also plant DeKalb 878 and Bioseed corn variety Healer 101. and Cargill were introduced. In 1995, farmers started planting Pioneer 3014. Cinco, Banga, South From 1980s to present, farmers planted white corn (Tiniguib, Pilit, In 2002 to 2010, farmers were introduced to Pioneer 30Y80. However, Cotabato Cebu), yellow corn from the Lumads (Carribean), Ayala seeds and SMC. farmers did not know it was Bt Corn because of the new brand name. In the 1990s to early 2000s farmers were introduced to Cargill hybrid In 2010, they started planting RR corn varieties. At present, they plant seeds and Pioneer 3014. GM corn varieties such as Dekalb 878, Healer 101, Dekalb 818 RRC2, Evogene and Pioneer 30Y18. South Sepaka, In the 1960s, farmers planted native white corn such as tiniguib and In 2004, Bt Corn was introduced to the farmers. In 2006, farmers Bagumbayan, Sultan open pollinated varieties. In the 1980s under Kilusan Kabuhayan at started planting GM corn varieties such as Dekalb 818 RRC2, Dekalb Kudarat Kaunlaran (KKK) livelihood program of then Pres. Marcos, hybrid corn 878, Bioseed – Healer 101 and Evogene. They also plant sweet corn varieties were introduced. Farmers also planted Pioneer 3014, Cargill and other native corn varieties. and Dekalb 818. Focused Group Discussions, February to March 2012

34 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

In Cordon, the farmers were told they could eat RR corn, which they did. In both barangays in Bayambang, the farmers claimed they were never warned not to eat the GM corn. Still some try to eat GM corn, especially farmers in Bgy. Macayo-cayo. They claimed they experience gas pains every time they eat GM corn and hence consume only one to two cobs, unlike with white corn which they consume and eat as much as they want. In the case areas in the Visayas, farmers claimed they were never told nor warned about the GM corn. The same is true for farmers in the case areas in Mindanao.

Meanwhile, even the Regional Field Unit Officer in Region XII claims that the GM corn can be eaten. However, the MAO in Echague says, “understandably, any corporation promoting their products would not admit to any negative side effects of their products”.

In a separate interview, National Corn Coordinator Milo de los Reyes also claims there are no known side effects to date from eating GM corn. In fact, Mr. Delos Reyes said that GM corn is used in corn chips and Promotional materials used by seed companies to convince farmers to snacks such as Chippy, Cornik, Boy Bawang. plant GM corn

Demo farms also played a major role in the introduction of GMOs. According to the MAO of Bayambang, people harvest festival held in his farm. All 42 corn varieties from Monsanto, Pioneer and Syngenta approached of Monsanto were planted to compare which has the his office in the early 2000s to introduce GM corn. best outcome. According to the corn farmer, he netted Several farmers were invited by the MAO to attend the Php112,000 in his last harvest of eight tons which he demonstration, after which, corporations contracted was able to sell for Php14 per kilo. Researchers have selected farmers whose corn farms were located asked for a copy of the contract agreement between along the road to serve as demonstration farms himself and Monsanto, however he said that he was (demo farms). Signage were put up to advertise the never provided a copy of the contract by Monsanto or corporation’s name and the corn variety planted. Corn Pioneer. farms along the highway traversing Pangasinan are also showcased by the seeds corporations. Other demo farms of Monsanto are located in the towns of Lemery and Batad, Iloilo. In the Visayas, demo farms were widely utilized by the seed companies. Corn harvest festivals are also held Farmers in Maayon and Dumarao, Capiz also confirmed where prospective buyers, producers and traders are the demo farms by seed companies. Farmers in Cordon, invited to inspect the corn variety. Demo farms are Isabela claimed that there were also demo farms in quite lucrative for farmers, as the corporations are Cauayan, which they claimed was the stronghold the ones who would normally shoulder the expenses of Monsanto. There were also demo farms in South while the farmer gets to sell the harvest and keep the Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat. proceeds. Government officials interviewed said they only A corn farmer from San Dionisio whose 1.8 hectares facilitated the consultations but did not take part in corn farm sits by the roadside related that he has been the promotion of GM corn or the set-up of demo farms. planting corn under contract with seed companies There were cases however when local government Pioneer and Monsanto. The last time his farm was used officials, including governors attend demonstration as a demo farm by Monsanto was in December 2011. programs to show and convince them that GM corn He recently harvested in February 2012 and many can be eaten, as in the case of Governor Larry de Pedro, traders including Monsanto officials came to the corn former governor of South Cotabato. GM corn seeds

35 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Field demonstration (demos) of GM corn at Brgy Macayocayo, Bayambang, Pangasinan. Farmers are attracted to accommodate GM corn field demos as they are given free seeds and finance for the planting GM corn. To assure them of profit, the products of the field demo are bought by the promoter.

actually find their way to the farmers through seeds to harvesting. The farmers provide the land. However, subsidy programs of the government. In Cuartero, the seed growers are not provided with a copy of the micro-credit institutions convince farmers to plant GM contract they have signed. corn by providing them loans for capital. Seed companies provide all the inputs including the Tracing the Value Chain farm workers and the supervisor to oversee the whole process of planting to harvesting. At Banga, Pioneer A. Seed supply and Evogene are the seeds companies that contract the farmers. Pioneer Hi-Breed set up office in Bgy. 5 in The seeds and agricultural inputs of these traders 2007 until 2009. Prior to this, they had seed growers mostly come from agrochemical TNCs Monsanto, from 2002 to 2007 in Polomolok, South Cotabato. Syngenta, Pioneer and Cargill. Seeds are grown locally by seed growers contracted by seeds corporations The terms of the contract however are not the same. or imported. In Pangasinan, AlDiz (Alvarez-Dizon) In Bgy. 6 in Banga, seed growers contracted out by supplies seeds and other agricultural inputs to traders. Pioneer Hi-Breed are assured of Php9,000 income AlDiz also supplies to agricultural traders in the Visayas even if the harvest is not the desired quota of eight and Mindanao. tons per hectare. Evogene does not require a quota for seed growers. Seeds corporations according to a The government also serves as supplier of GM corn to barangay official in Banga, apply for permit to contract farmers through seed subsidies in times of calamities. seed growing from the Municipal Office. The barangay Seed corporations bid against each other to win the captain issues certification for seed growers of GM contract of supplying the seeds to the government. corn.

Farmers also get seeds from the local seed growers, Imported Seeds who ‘illegally’ sell the seeds contracted by the companies. These seeds, called “ukay-ukay” are sold at Most of GM corn seeds imports come from Argentina a much cheaper price than the regular GM corn sold by and South Africa, with the US a distant third. Other traders. The ukay-ukay seeds however are untreated sources of GM corn seeds are Brazil, India, and Thailand. with chemicals and may be a mixture of seeds coming For GM soybeans, the US is the number one supplier from different contract growing seed farms hence the (Table 22). On the other hand, the country exported name. GM corn seeds only once in 2006 at a minimal 71.21 kilograms to Colombia. Seed growers B. Corn traders There are farmers contracted to grow seeds in Mindanao. Three were interviewed in Banga, South Seeds and farm inputs such as fertilizers and pesticides Cotabato. According to the corn farmers, Monsanto and are sourced from the local suppliers or traders. Because Pioneer provide the financing from land preparation of expensive capitalization in GM corn farming, most

36 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

Table 22. Volume of Importation of GM Seeds by GM Crop and Country of Origin, 2007-2012 (metric tons) Commodity and Country 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 As of Jan 2012 Total GM Corn 92.352 899.076 186,509.323 213.000 4,574.360 0.085 192,288.196 Argentina 92.352 168.009 182,579.500 - 1,932.077 - 184,771.938 Brazil - - 0.018 - 0.061 - 0.079 USA - 0.014 0.017 - 42.379 0.085 42.495 South Africa - 731.053 3,929.788 213.000 2,595.578 - 7,469.419 Thailand - - - - 1.020 - 1.020 India - - - - 3.245 - 3.245 GM Soybean - 1,978.000 4,238.000 625.000 6,235.748 - 13,076.748 Canada - - 102.000 - 151.330 - 253.330 USA - 1,978.000 4,091.000 625.000 5,169.714 - 11,863.714 China - - 45.000 - - - 45.000 Argentina - - - - 914.704 - 914.704 Source: Plant Quarantine Service, BPI of the farmers borrow inputs or capital from the is the brother of an incumbent Municipal traders. Thus the traders also serve as the financiers Councilor. Likewise in Bayambang, two of their for planting GM corn. Traders would also advise and incumbent Provincial Councilors have linked up recommend to the farmers which seed varieties would their businesses to finance and provide inputs to produce the best harvest. farmers. In Capiz and Iloilo, the LGU officials and their relatives are involved in corn trading and Big traders are usually Filipino or Filipino-Chinese financing. businessmen engaged in trading and transportation of agricultural products including animal feeds. They • In Maayon, the incumbent Bgy. Captain of also venture in other businesses such as hardware, Quinabonglan used to work for a big trader groceries, among others. Some are board members in Iloilo. His family finances corn farmers in of national federations like the Philippine Maize Quinabonglan. In Iloilo, the wife of San Dionisio Federation (PhilMaize). Mayor also finances corn production. In Bgy. Carataya, Cuartero, farmers said that the trader- There are also small traders operating at the barangay financiers are the incumbent Mayor and a or municipal levels, or large traders engaging at the Provincial Councilor. provincial to regional and inter-regional transactions. • In San Fernando, Bukidnon, farmers identified the Local politicians such as Mayors, Vice Mayors, Provincial incumbent Mayor and Bgy. Captains of Halapitan or Municipal Councilors as well as Barangay Captains, and Kagalangan as financier-traders. In Banga, or relatives of politicians or people in the government South Cotabato, the incumbent Mayor and his are also into trading. They may be incumbent or relative, are among the financier-traders. have served their terms in previous administrations but have maintained their influence in the profitable C. Production business of trading and financing. These government officials also own agricultural supplies stores. Some are Except for Macayo-cayo and Banaban, all the case also involved in buying and selling corn. areas plant the stacked trait GM corn (Bt and herbicide resistance). The production process for the case areas • For example in Bgy. Villa Rey in Echague, farmers differs only in the order of application of the herbicide said that the big financier-traders are the glyphosate. incumbent Municipal Councilor and the Mayor and Vice Mayor from the nearby municipality of If corn is planted in hilly farmlands, land preparation San Guillermo. A big financier-trader in Echague starts with the farmers spraying the herbicide over

37 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

their fields to kill weeds. In lowland corn farming, in Bgy. Macayo-cayo feed the weeds to their livestock farmers spray the herbicide days after the corn seeds and so use only Bt corn. In Bgy. Banaban, farmers has been planted. also do not use the stacked variety. Although they spray herbicide to the GM corn, they only use the The process of corn production in the uplands are as conventional weed killer rather than the glyphosate follows: herbicide which is expensive.

1. GM corn production starts with spraying the field Farmers observe that the GM corn only produces good with Roundup herbicide or glyphosate. Corn harvest under good weather conditions during the farmers usually use Roundup, Clear-out, Shine, first one to two croppings, but would later on require Sharpshooter brands. more bags of fertilizers to produce the same volume of 2. After two weeks from herbicide spraying, the land harvest. But because of increasing costs of inputs, corn is ploughed up using carabao to establish the seed farmers apply fewer amounts of fertilizers and hence rows. Fertilizer is applied simultaneously with the get almost the same volume of harvest if they use the ploughing. After which, the seeds are planted in conventional variety of hybrid corn. They plant GM the seed rows or seed planting tools so-called corn with the assurance from companies that it would “armalite” or “jabber”. have greater resistance to the corn borer. 3. Spraying of herbicide follows after two weeks. 4. Two weeks later, another round of fertilizers is D. Who are the corn buyers? applied (side-dress). 5. Again spraying of herbicide is done after 7 to 15 Farmers sell their corn back to their financier-traders. days. During harvest, agents of these traders go to the farms 6. A final application of fertilizers or top dress is done, and collect the harvest. From the traders, the corn especially when the soil is acidic, or has ‘aged’ in is sold and delivered to the feed-millers and feeds farmer’s terms. suppliers. 7. Harvesting is done after 120 days from planting. The traders, because they are the farmers’ financiers, Corn farmers in the case areas normally plant corn are the ones who also set the buying price. Corn prices twice a year, with some planting a third crop if the are relatively higher at the start of the harvest season, weather for corn production is favorable. For farmers in but as corn starts to pile up with the simultaneous Bayambang, they only plant corn once a year because harvests, corn prices decreases almost every day. they plant rice during the rainy season. According to the farmers and LGU officials interviewed, Corn is planted in June or July and in November corn from Isabela and Pangasinan is sold to millers in or December. Harvest season is in the months of September or October and in January or February. For Table 23. Key Players of the Local Feed Milling some farmers, the third cropping is in March or April Industry, 2007 and harvest is in June or July. Daily Production Name of Company Brand name Capacity (in metric In Bayambang where rain is scarce, corn farmers tons) irrigate four times during the cultivation period. San Miguel Foods B-Meg Feeds 3,229 Irrigation is done on the same day as the application of fertilizers. Cargill Philippines Purina Feeds 1,760 Swift Foods Blue Ribbon Feeds 1,612 Fertilizer application and spraying of herbicide is done General Milling General Feeds & Megamix 1,520 depending on the condition of the corn farms. A good harvest for GM corn is also dependent on the amount Vitarich Corporation Vitarich, Vitalux & Bionic 1,387 of fertilizers applied. To get a good harvest, corn Tyson Agro-ventures Tyson Feeds 800 farmers would apply 10 to 12 bags of fertilizers per Sun Jin Philippines Sun Jin Meals 760 hectare, but because of increasing costs of fertilizers, Foremost Farms Famous & Rich Feeds 720 only 6 to 8 bags of fertilizers are usually applied. Universal Robina Star Feeds 555 598 Some farmers would opt not to apply herbicides and Grain Handlers Mighty Feeds 450 instead feed the weeds to their farm animals. Farmers Source: Philippine Association of Feed Millers, Inc.

38 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

39 Sacks of corn coming from far-flung areas in Capiz will be weighed and sold to a corn trader. Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Tarlac, Pampanga, Bulacan, Bataan, down to Batangas Government intervention in corn trading – to Robina Farms, B-Meg, and Selecta Feeds. Pioneer also buys corn from the traders. In Isabela, farmers Other than the financier-traders, farmers may also say that the Mindanao Grains Processing Co. (MGPC) sell to the corn drying facility of NABCOR as well located in Reina Mercedes buys corn in cobs from as the NFA. NABCOR buys the corn in cobs from the the farmers, but only farmers who are not tied to the farmers, but these should have at least 30% moisture traders are able to sell. content. The drier the corn, the higher is the buying price. NABCOR is a government-owned and controlled In the Visayas, traders and feed millers are found in corporation (GOCC) operating parallel to the thrust Iloilo, such as Purina, B-Meg, Lovefeeds, Midway, of the DA. It acts as the trading and marketing arm Vitarich, and Foremost. In 2011, 78% of corn produced of the DA in the acquisition and distribution of farm in Region VI was utilized by local feedmillers while the outputs and inputs for the small farmers and fisherfolk. rest was shipped to Manila, Batangas, Cebu, and Ilocos. NABCOR also initiates “pioneering or missionary-type” projects to prime agribusiness investments in areas In Mindanao, traders sell the corn to B-Meg, Sulu Feeds, where private sector participation is not yet available Limketkai, Bounty Fresh, Gamma Foods, Vitarich, due to risks. Adahar, William Go, Eden Trucking, Ochoa, Vicky Tan, Mindanao Grains, PG Ang, and Purefoods. These feed Usually NABCOR is established in areas where there millers are located in Cagayan de Oro, General Santos are corn clusters of at least 200 hectares. There are City, and Tacurong. Corn from Region XII is also shipped currently 14 NABCOR facilities across the country with to Manila, Cebu, and Davao. a total capacity of 1,400 MT per day.

B-Meg, Purina and Vitarich are brand names of the On the other hand, to be able to sell to the NFA, feeds owned by San Miguel Foods, Cargill Philippines farmers are required to have a passbook. A passbook and Vitarich Corporation, respectively, which are requires farmers to show proof of ownership to their members of the Philippine Association of Feed Millers, corn farms, which most corn farmers do not have Inc or PAFMI. especially farmers whose lands are being contested. Likewise, for the NABCOR, the traders are the ones able PAFMI’s 29 members represent about 80% of the entire to access its facilities rather than the small farmers. feed milling industry composed of about 600 feed Farmers financially tied to traders also cannot sell millers (365 of which are commercial feed millers). directly to NABCOR. The volume of corn procured by San Miguel Foods comprise 35% of the total feeds NABCOR is also limited, thus farmers are forced to sell production of the PAFMI. their produce to local corn traders.

Mindanao Grain Processing Co. (MGPC) is part of the GM Corn Impacts on Smallholder farmers La Filipina Uy Gongco Corp. group of companies and is consistently among the top agribusiness corporations The smallholder farmers and the tenants in the case in the country. The largest corn processing plant in study areas experienced: 1) increasing indebtedness; Southeast Asia, Reina Mercedes Corn Processing 2) loss of ownership of their lands and control over Center (RMCC) is co-financed and partly owned by their seeds; 3) food insecurity from loss of biodiversity MGPC together with the NFA. MGPC has two other including heavy soil erosion; and 4) threats to health. corn processing centers in Bukidnon but the RMCC has five times the capacity of the Bukidnon plants. Negative net income

According to the RFU Officer of the DA in Region 10, the In all the 12 case areas, farmers have incurred negative traders also serve as informal contractors by getting returns and most of them are indebted to their sure supply for the feed millers that also own livestock financier-traders. Based on the computation of their and poultry farms such as San Miguel Corporations’ costs of production per hectare in the last cropping B-MEG, Purina, Universal Robina, Vitarich, Lucio Tan’s season, farmers who used their own cash as capital True Feeds, among others. San Miguel Corporation may earn Php520 to Php19,160 to being bankrupt by however has contract growing arrangements with Php6,610 or more in one season of planting GM corn. corn farmers in Isabela and other provinces. For those who borrowed money from financier-traders, only a fraction of them earned while many ended up with negative income.

40 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

The farmers who earned however said that in reality Before, farmers also saved the seeds and hence saved nothing came back because almost all of their on the cost of seeds. With GM corn, they can only production needs including food were financed by plant the seeds once. They tried planting the seeds for the traders. According to one farmer in Bgy Banaban, another cropping but produced poor results. Farmers “Nakain mo na di mo pa naaani” (You have already also complained that there are GM seeds that are not consumed what you have yet to harvest). There are viable. This thus affects the overall yield of the farm. some farmers who have family members working They also say that companies do not replace seeds that abroad that at times provide support. In such instances, did not germinate. the farmers could fetch higher prices for their corn because they were not indebted to the financiers- The combined cost of GM corn seeds and herbicides traders and not forced to sell at lower prices dictated eat up 22-26% of the farmers’ total cost of production. by the traders. They were free to sell to any trader with Fertilizers on the other hand eat up around 18-22% of the highest buying price for corn. the total cost of producing GM corn (Table 27). Thus, about 40-48% of the total costs by the farmer are Table 24 shows the summary of farmers’ net income external inputs, and these goes to the corn traders/ assuming good harvests. The situation is worse in times finaciers and seed and agrochemical companies. of bad harvests. Net income is computed based on farmer’s own capital for production (SELF FINANCED) Meanwhile, farm workers lose their livelihood as and if the capital was loaned from financiers-traders weeders since they are not needed in the corn farms (LOAN FINANCED). Computation of the cost of anymore as farmers are now using Roundup ready production per hectare in selected case areas is located variety of the GM corn. Likewise, bayanihan culture, at the appendix section (Appendix 3, Tables 1 and 2). which was previously widely practiced in the rural communities, is now seldom practiced with the Apart from being indebted to the financier-traders, adoption of GM corn. prices of inputs and seeds have also gone up. From 2003 to 2011, the price of Complete (14-14-14) and Urea, Also, the traders and the feed millers dictate the prices the most common fertilizers used by the corn farmers, of yellow corn. World prices of corn and its substitutes, increased annually by 13.7% and 10.6%, respectively. wheat and soybeans, also influence the local prices Prices peaked in 2008, reaching Php1,671.67 per bag of corn. Prices of yellow corn are pulled down every of 14-14-14 and Php1,551.43 for Urea. In the same year, time imported corn comes in and during harvest the national average price for 14-14-14 peaked in June season. Traders and feed millers may declare a “stop 2008 at Php 1,671.67 per bag. (Figure 4) buying” operation, which further pulls down the prices of corn. This is one way by which traders and feed Farmers in Capiz and Bukidnon said they stopped millers manipulate prices of corn and increase their planting GM corn for a while in 2007 to 2008 when profit margins. The farmers, while being the primary prices of fertilizers skyrocketed. producers of yellow corn, have no participation in the price determination of their own produce. Also, the introductory price of GM corn was almost the same as the conventional hybrid corn in the early 2000s. Usurious rates of Traders Farmers said that the GM corn seeds were sold to them before at 18 to 20 kilos per bag. In Carataya, Cuartero With GM corn now a commodity bought every season, for example, the Roundup ready GM corn then cost traders and financiers took advantage of the situation. Php2,800 per 18-kilo bag. In 2008, it cost Php4,600 for Traders charge farmers with 5-10% monthly interest every 9-kilo bag. Farmers had to spend Php9,200 for on the farmers’ loans. The inputs are also priced higher two bags of the RR GM corn for one hectare. Table 25 when bought on a loan basis. Depending on the presents a comparative price of conventional hybrid product, price mark-up ranges from Php5 to as high as corn and GM corn in Region 10. Php1,500 per product.

GM corn seeds bag then was packaged with the In the four months of GM corn cultivation, farmers Roundup herbicide. Nowadays, farmers complain, would have to pay interest on their loans ranging from the GM seeds and herbicide are sold separately and 20-40 percent. They are bound to sell their produce to the Roundup is the most expensive brand that corn the traders at a price usually lower than the prevailing farmers are using. (Table 26) market price. Farmers also lose more to the traders

41 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 24a. Net Income of Self-financed Farmers Planting GM Corn Net Income Case Areas Average Yield (tons/ha) Total Cost (Php) Gross Income (Php) SELF FINANCED (Php) Villa Rey, Echague, Isabela 5.2 (3.5 – 5.2) 43,110 38,550 – 44,400 (4,260) – 8,480 Caquilingan, Cordon, Isabela 5 (1.6 – 7.7) 49,900 – 52,110 55,000 2,890 – 5,100 Banaban, Bayambang, Pangasinan 7.5 (4 – 7.5) 70,840 90,000 19,160 Macayo-cayo, Bayambang, Pangasinan 5.46 (4 – 5.46) 53,242 –62,667 65,520 2,853 – 12,278 San Nicolas, San Dionisio, Iloilo 3 (3.8 – 6) 43,610 – 45,350 37,500 (7,850) - (6,110) Quinabonglan, Maayon, Capiz 3.55 (3.5 – 4.5) 42,941 – 48,761 42,600 (6,280) – (341) Carataya, Cuartero, Capiz 4.8 (2.1 – 4.8) 48,530 – 50,970 60,000 9,030 – 11,470 Bungsuan, Dumarao, Capiz 5.32 (2.8 – 5.32) 57,349 – 61,549 63,840 2,291 – 6,341 ** Halapitan, San Fernando, Bukidnon 4.95 (4.2 – 5) 45,451- 46,531 59,400 12,869 – 13,949 Mindagat, Malitbog, Bukidnon 3.5 (3.5 – 4.5) 40,501 – 45,126 35,000 (10,126) – 6,299 Cinco, Banga, South Cotabato 7.29 (7 – 9.7)* 30,765 – 37,388 37,908 (1,455.60) – 7,143 South Sepaka, Bagumbayan, Sultan Kudarat 8.25 (8 – 8.25)* 33,000 – 34,300 41,250 6,950 – 8,250 (formerly part of Sto Niño, South Cotabato) * weight in cobs ** If rice was loaned ex. 6 sacks x 1,500 to 2,000 per sack of rice, the farmer would be indebted by 2,000 to 4,000; up to 8,000 to 10,000 after four months Numbers in parenthesis under Average Yield are range of yield depending on weather and fertilizer input Figures enclosed in parenthesis under Net Income posted negative income

Table 24b. Net Income of Farmers Planting GM Corn, Loan Basis Net Income (in pesos) Case Areas Average Yield (tons/ha) Total Cost (in pesos) Gross Income (in pesos) LOAN BASIS Villa Rey, Echague, Isabela 5.2 (3.5 – 5.2) 58,420 38,850 – 44,000 (19,570) – (6,830) Caquilingan, Cordon, Isabela 5 (1.6 – 7.7) 62,600 – 63,550 55,000 (9,150) – (7,000 ) Banaban, Bayambang, Pangasinan 7.5 (4 – 7.5) 81,710 90,000 8,110 - 8,290 Macayo-cayo, Bayambang, Pangasinan 5.46 (4 – 5.46) 61,507 – 76,015 65,520 (10,495) – 4,013 San Nicolas, San Dionisio, Iloilo 3 (3.8 – 6) 51,757 – 53,845 37,500 (16,345) - (14,257) Quinabonglan, Maayon, Capiz 3.55 (3.5 – 4.5) 53,388.64 – 64,892.52 42,600 (22,293) – (10,788.64) Tenant: Tenant: Tenant: 58,181.06 – 66,872.58 36,900 (30,267.60) – (22,281.06) Carataya, Cuartero, Capiz 4.8 (2.1 – 4.8) 57,716 – 60,644 60,000 (644) - 2,284 Tenant: Tenant: Tenant: 98,988.60 – 101,112.60 12,000 (86,988.60) – (89,112.60) Bungsuan, Dumarao, Capiz 5.32 (2.8 – 5.32) 62,253 – 71,093.50 63,840 (7,253.50) – 1,587 –** Halapitan, San Fernando, Bukidnon 4.95 (4.2 – 5) 55,015 – 60,390 59,400 (990) – 4,385 Mindagat, Malitbog, Bukidnon 3.5 (3.5 – 4.5) 53,581 – 58,886 35,000 (23,886) – (6,781) Cinco, Banga, South Cotabato 7.29 (7 – 9.7)* 37,973 – 43,488 37,908 (8,928) to (65) Cotabato) 8.25 (8 – 8.25)* 37,208.80 – 40,304 41,250 946 – 3,529.20 * weight in cobs ** add to this the loan incurred by the farmers from borrowing an average of 6 cavans of rice, the corn farmer would be indebted by 9,813 to 18,653.50 Numbers in parenthesis under Average Yield are range of yield depending on weather and fertilizer input Figures enclosed in parenthesis under Net Income posted negative income

42 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

Figure 4. Fertilizer Prices, 2023-2011

14-14-14 476.66 659.81 767.36 746.21 796.4 1,671.67 1,193.13 1,068.46 1,147.13 Urea 550.96 741.75 897.74 898.95 961.08 1,551.43 975.88 948.47 1,157.00

Source: Fertilizer and Pesticides Authority

Table 25. Price Comparison of Conventional Hybrid Corn with GM corn, 2011 and 2012 (SRP*) Variety Weight (kg) 2011 2012 Hybrid Corn ACM 800 18 2,700 2,700 Bioseed 828 18-20 3,900 4,200 Bioseed 9909 18-20 3,900 3,900 GSI 40 18 2,500 2,700 NK 8840 18-20 4,200 4,500 NK Jumbo (Syngenta) 18 4,000 4,500 Pioneer 30B80 18 4,600 4,850 Pioneer 30M50 18-20 3,900 4,200 Pioneer 30W40 18 3,600 3,780 GM Corn Bioseed Healer 101 9 4,000 4,900 Dekalb RR 818 9 4,000 4,700 Dekalb RR 878 9 4,200 4,900 Pioneer 30G80 (RR) 9 3,800 4,500 Pioneer 30YR 9 4,000 4,500 Peasant leader Ben Cardenas shows an example of GM corn bag that the farmers purchase at local traders and agricultural supply stores. He Pioneer 3645YR 9 4,000 4,500 noted that thru the years the GM corn seeds are getting more expensive, Pioneer 3T80 9 4,000 4,500 but on the other hand the seed quantity/weight per bag has been Source: DA-RFU Region 10 halved from 18 kilograms to 9 kilograms per bag.

43 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 26. Price Range of Herbicides Commonly Used by Farmers (per gallon) HERBICIDE PRICE – RANGE (Php) Power 1100, 1200 Round-Up 1400, 1500, 1600, 1800 Spitfire 1200 Shine 1100 Clear-Out 1200, 1400, Sharpshooter 1100, 1480 Source: FGDs in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, February to March 2012 Some of the herbicides used in herbicide tolerant corn farms.

Table 27: Summary of Cost and Percent to the financier-traders and their guarantors. Interest Share to Total, Cost of GM Corn Production if on loans including mark-up eats up about 26% of the Self-Financed or thru Loan, Brgy Bungsuan, farmers’ total cost of production. Dumarao, Capiz* Summary of cost ITEM Aside from production expenses, farmers also borrow SELF FINANCED LOAN for their daily sustenance while waiting for harvest. LABOR 20,030.00 (32.5) 20,030.00 (28.2) Farmers would normally borrow cavans of rice from FOOD 4,200.00 (6.8) 4,200.00 (5.9) the same traders and pay up to Php2,500 per cavan of rice, which only costs Php1,100 to Php1,200 if SEEDS 9,100.00 (14.8) 12,420.00 (17.5) bought in cash. For instance, during the lean months FERTILIZERS 11,240.00 (18.3) 15,849.00 (22.3) of August and September, truckloads of cavans of rice HERBICIDES 4,500.00 (7.3) 6,115.50 (8.6) come from the central city, which the farmers borrow RENT** 7,760.00 (12.6) 7,760.00 (10.9) from traders. Other than rice, farmers also borrow for education expenses, hospitalization, and electricity, AUXILLARY*** 4,719.00 (7.7) 4,719.00 (6.6) among others. Farmers also borrow capital for planting TOTAL 61,549.00 71,093.50 other crops such as rice. *computed at maximum rate **includes drying facility, draft animal and shelling • For example, the owner of the Model Agricultural Supply was identified by the farmers as the ***includes transportation cost, sack and twine biggest agricultural supplier cum trader in Iloilo. Note: values in parenthesis are percent share to total. The trader also supplies to farmers in Capiz and See Appendix 4 for the computation of the cost of production through his agents and middlemen, finances corn production. Main suppliers shipping corn seeds and inputs in Iloilo prioritize the trader’s company. The financiers acquire supplies from him. because traders would declare a lower weight for the farmers’ corn by 3 to 5 kilos per cavan, a sort of ‘system • In Cordon, Isabela traders charge 5-10% interest loss’. Assuming that farmers sell 100 cavans of dried every month for 5 months. For example, if the corn kernels to the traders at a minimum Php10 per farmer borrows Php5,000 after 5 months, it would kilo, the farmers would lose an additional Php3,000 to be repaid by Php6,250. If the farmers fails to pay Php5,000. the principal and the interest on the fifth month, an interest of 5% will be charged on the principal Financier-traders also charge the farmers in and accumulated interest or Php6,250 x 5%. The compounded interest rates if they fail to pay after loan and interest is compounded as in bank loans. harvest. Some however show some compassion, Sometimes farmers pay one cavan of palay for foregoing the compounding of interest and just every Php1,000 loan. leave the principal loan as is. Farmers lament that even though GM corn production has higher yield • In Banaban, Bayambang, Pangasinan financier- or heavier corn cobs, farmers still end up indebted traders charge 5-10% every month for 4 months.

44 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

45 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Traders would not lend again unless farmers pay Through buy and sell, interest is 10% per month up their loans. Farmers said they often receive and buying price of corn is 20 cents lower than invectives from the traders should they fail to pay prevailing price per kilo of corn on time. • In Bagumbayan, Sultan Kudarat, financier-traders • In Bgy. Macayo-cayo, Pangasinan, financier-traders charge an interest of 8% per month on items or charge farmers 30% interest in four months and cash loans plus additional Php20-30 mark-up per add a high mark-up on agricultural supplies (e.g. bag of inputs. seeds, fertilizers, pesticides) sold to farmers from Php200 to as high as Php1,500. Some government officials avail of loan from the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) and lends to • The financier-traders in San Nicolas, San Dionisio, farmers at very high interest rates. For example one Iloilo charge farmers 5% interest per month on top financier-trader corn farmer in Echague borrows from of the mark-up on agricultural supplies bought by a certain municipal councilor of nearby San Guillermo the farmers on loan. Municipality. The councilor borrows from LBP at 12% interest per annum but relends to farmers at 30-35% • In Quinabonglan, Maayon in Capiz, traders charge interest per month. The corn farmers are enlisted interest of 5-6% per month. Corn farmers would as members of his cooperative without the farmers sometimes work for the financiers to be able to knowing so. repay debts. The corn farmers either go directly to their financier- • In Bgy. Carataya in Cuartero, the financier-traders traders or pass through a layer of guarantors who charge 5% interest every month until harvest or serve as go-between for the traders and corn farmers. 20% interest. Should farmers fail to pay in time, The guarantors normally invest nothing, just their the interest is compounded for every month the reputation and good financial standing with the farmers fail to pay. They also charge additional traders, but earn so much from the interest on loans to mark-up on regular prices of inputs. the corn farmers.

• In Bgy. Bungsuan, Dumarao, the financier-traders Losing farmers’ rights come from nearby Passi and Cuartero. They charge 5% - 8% interest with additional Php10 to According to farmers in Cordon, Isabela, it would Php50 mark-up on the normal prices of inputs . take three cropping seasons of good harvest before Farmers sign an agreement with financiers. Some farmers could recover from bankruptcy. There are also agreements are even notarized. times when good harvests bring in so much cash to farmers they are able to buy their own tractors and • In San Fernando, Bukidnon, farmers borrow cash threshers which they then rent out to other farmers for from the traders-financiers. They are required to additional incomes. But these opportunities come by give collaterals such as land titles to avail cash only once in so many instances of bad harvests. loans. Most of the titles of the corn farmers are with the traders. Financier-traders collect a monthly With GM corn, traders now have control over farmers. interest of 10 percent. In nearby barangays of Because they are indebted, farmers lose so much to Kagalangan and Nakabuclad, 50% of corn farmers financier-traders including control over their lands, as are now farm workers in their own farms as they well as decisions on what crops to plant and which seed are unable to realize profits from their corn farms to plant, because traders would not lend to farmers and hence cannot pay their loans. unless they use GM corn. Traders also insist on which brand farmers should buy even if the farmers want • In Malitbog, the corn farmers do not know their another brand. Likewise, the farmers cannot choose financier-traders. They avail of loans through which variety to plant as the traders would insist on guarantors and middlemen who they refused selling one particular brand because of the incentives to name. They are charged 4% a month on their given by the seed companies should the traders reach loans. a certain quota. In many cases, farmers are made to sign a blank paper by the traders to serve as proof of • In Banga, South Cotabato, the financier-traders their terms of payment. charge an interest of 8% to 15% per month.

46 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

Box 3. Case Study of a Seed Grower in Mindanao Mang Claro is a corn farmer for the past 15 years in Mindanao. He was contracted by one of the leading seed corporations in the country to grow GM Corn seeds. Back then he had 3.8 hectares of farmland – two hectares inherited by his wife and the other half he inherited from his parents. The first time he planted the GM corn for Pioneer, he was able to meet the quota and profit from the returns. The seed corporation shouldered all the expenses but these were deducted upon harvest. The next time his land was contracted for the GM corn seeds however the corporation sprayed on glyphosate to test it. However, it burned the corn plants. Apparently the GM corn seeds were being tested on his farm without his knowledge. The corporation did not pay Mang Claro for the damaged crop planted over his 2.2 hectares farm. The contract he signed with the corporation had a waiver on the insurance of the crops stating “insurance not obligatory”. Mang Claro ended up bankrupt and had nothing to pay his debts that accumulated for the four-month corn cropping season. Added to this was the huge cost he had to pay for the hospitalization of his father who died later. Unable to pay his debts which had compounded, Mang Claro was forced to enter his 1.8-hectare farmland in Banga to Dole-Stanfilco under a lease-contract for a period of 15 years. Dole has already paid in the first five years equivalent to Php60,000 or Php12,000 a year or about Php33 per day for the 1.8 hectare farmlot which Dole-Stanfilco planted with its famous bananas. Mang Claro is not to touch his farm for 15 years.

Interestingly, most farmers interviewed would not farmers lose the land completely because of additional admit that they are in debt. Key informant interviews loans made to the guarantor or trader for unforeseen with peasant leaders as well as barangay officials expenses until the farmers can no longer pay up their however revealed that almost all of the corn farmers accumulated loans. planting GM corn have become so indebted to the traders that many of them have lost their rights over In Dumarao, ARBs who chose to apply for individual their lands. Traders would take over their lands and CLOAs from the mother or collective CLOA earlier the farmers would become farm workers in their own awarded them by the DAR have given up their rights to lands. their lands either through prenda, or completely sold their rights over the land to the guarantor or the trader. To be able to pay, farmers would sell their livestock including their carabaos to the traders. Some farmers In other cases, the guarantors are also forced to give venture into livestock and poultry in order to finance up their lands to the traders especially when farmers their corn farming or for repayment of debts. whom they guaranteed fail to pay their debts. A guarantor in Quinabonglan, Maayon even spent a In some instances, others would hold on to their farms night in jail because she was not able to collect from and not allow the traders to take over their lands. This the farmers and pay the trader their due debts. is especially true in Echague. In Cordon, the farmers’ association would try to save their members’ lands Farmers bear the humiliation of being shouted at from being taken over by the traders. Instead of and given invectives by the financier-traders. Others surrendering their lands to the traders, the farmers choose to leave and transfer to another place without would let another farmer from their organization to options to pay up. One mother in Cordon, Isabela work over their farms until such time that they are able shared that the family would spend sleepless nights to earn and pay up and take the land back. to save whatever there is worth saving from their corn harvests in order to pay for their mounting debts – In San Dionisio, the wife of the former mayor took “Agsang-sangit kami lattan, pampanunutem ta nagadu over the land of a corn farmer because of the latter’s utang mi, kasano kami nga makabayad ton…” (We just indebtedness. According to a corn farmer in San cry as we ponder about our debts and how we will be Nicolas, only five corn farmers in the community are able to pay up). not tied to financiers. Farmers do not only lose their rights to the land but In Cuartero and Dumarao in Capiz, Agrarian Reform also their rights to resources. Apart from not being able Beneficiaries (ARBs) have given up the lands awarded to replant seeds, because GM corn, just like the hybrid them through the government’s land reform program corn, cannot be replanted to produce the same results, through “prenda” or sold the land to the guarantor or there is also the question on intellectual property rights trader to whom they are indebted. In many cases, the (IPR) or patent rights. Seed corporations hold the IPR

47 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

over the seed technology and farmers are prohibited attack the vegetables including the fruits. Cassava and to replant and re-use the seeds for cross breeding with sweet potato become fibrous when planted near the other varieties without paying royalties to the owner cornfields, hence become hard and inedible. of the patent, the seed companies. In Mindagat, Malitbog, a farmer-leader complained Impact on biodiversity that the fruits of his mangoes and bananas were deformed after farmers started planting GM corn and The most evident impact of wide-scale use of the GM spraying herbicides near his farmlands. corn is on the environment. Farmers complain about the loss of biodiversity, emergence of super pests and Wild vegetables such as the wild bitter melon that super weeds, increasing soil erosion and landslides, grow in the farm have also disappeared. So are the and the infestation of a plant disease that only recently fishes in rivers. White corn are also contaminated with affected thousands of hectares of corn farms in North GM corn. Farmers observe that earthworms are now Cotabato. very rare.

The introduction of the stacked trait variety of GM Super pests corn which is resistant to corn borer infestation and glyphosate application that eliminates weeds has New corn pests have also emerged like the corn plant apparently freed farmers from the labor-intensive task hopper (CPH) or waya-waya observed in Pangasinan, of weeding. It saved the farmers labor time including Iloilo, Capiz, South Cotabato, and Bukidnon. In 2010, the time to wait before planting the corn seedlings. the waya-waya started infesting many of the corn About 94% of the GM corn farms as of 2011 is planted farms in San Nicolas, San Dionisio, Iloilo where most to the stacked variety of the GM corn. of the farmers went bankrupt. The farmers tried to use Furadan but to no avail. The CPH apparently attacks However, after continuous use of the stacked trait every second cropping in December and January variety of GM corn, wild vegetation has disappeared, and the farmers suspect the GM corn has become soils have become increasingly prone to erosion, and vulnerable to the CPH. The pest attacks the Bt corn and the GM corn itself has become vulnerable to plant stacked variety of GM corn. diseases. Another pest, a tiny black insect according to the The farmers in all case areas also complain of not being farmers has also infested corn farms in Capiz especially able to plant vegetables and rootcrops near their GM in Cuartero. They have tried to use the pesticide Karate cornfields. When using the stacked trait variety of GM to control it but the pest persists. corn, spraying the herbicide kills the vegetation in the immediate proximity. Herbicide drift affects the Farmers have also observed that the corn borer has leaves of vegetables and deforms fruits. Pests also started to infest even the GM corn, apparently having developed resistance to the Bt corn.

Worse, in Alamada, North Cotabato, about 9,688 Figure 5. % Share of GM Corn per Variety hectares of corn farms equivalent to about 60,000 MT Bt Corn RR Corn Stacked Pyramided of corn have reportedly been infested by the Banded Leaf and Sheath Blight (BLSB) in early 2011. BLSB 1% 3% 2% according to the DA-BPI is caused by Rhizoctonia solani, a soil-borne fungus that infects the corn plant from later whorl to ear formation. It usually infects corn farms during the rainy season. Infected corn residues such as leaves and stalks must be dried, burned or buried and deep ploughed under the soil to prevent spreading of the disease.

According to the Region 12 RFU Officer of the DA, the disease is traced to the no-till farming due to the 94% incessant use of Roundup herbicide. Corn farmers have been advised to go back to deep ploughing.This

48 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

Corn borer damage on Pioneer 30Y80 Bt corn plant. Farmers have documented increasing corn borer damage on their crops, saying that the Bt corn are losing its ‘potency’ and that the corn borers are becoming more resistant. would lose the sense of using glyphosate-tolerant GM A hectare of Roundup Ready corn needs about 4 corn but the RFU said only deep ploughing can stop liters of glyphosate or Round-up Herbicide to kill the spread of BLSB. Likewise, another commonly weeds, which farmers apply twice per season. Rough observed illness of the GM corn is the stalk rot. Stalk rot estimate states that if there are 658,846 ha of RR corn is caused by several disease-causing fungi, with plants and stacked trait corn (with herbicide resistance) in usually exhibiting diseased roots and crown. the country that use herbicides, then about 5,270,768 liters of herbicide are being sprayed in a season. This Super weeds figure will double as there are two planting seasons of corn in the country. This is a far cry from the claim that Not only has the soil become prone to erosion, super GMOs would decrease the use of pesticides. weeds have also been observed. In Banga, South Cotabato for instance, the Roundup herbicide is unable Infertile, aging soils to exterminate the broad-leaf vine-like “oyampong”. Only 2,4-D is able to kill the weeds. Also in Cordon, Farmers also observe that the soil has ‘aged’ faster Isabela, corn farmers use 2,4 D in their land preparation than before, after planting GM corn. Farmers in all case for corn planting. areas complain they have to use increasing amounts of fertilizers to achieve good harvest. The soil has also Incidentally 2,4-D or 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid become harder or compact and needs to be ploughed is among the chemicals reported to have reproductive twice. Even mungbeans have to be applied fertilizers and endocrine-disrupting effects. It is classified by nowadays, unlike before GM corn when farmers would the World Health Organization (WHO) as Class II not need to fertilize the crop. ‘moderately hazardous’ pesticide. This places it in the same class as endosulfan, lindane, paraquat and This tendency of the soil to become infertile even when toxaphene – the first three are banned pesticides in applied with increasing amount of fertilizers is due to the Philippines. the continuous application of pesticides that affect the soil ecology, eliminating beneficial microbes and

49 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Leaves of string beans affected by the application of Roundup ready (glyphosate) in combination with 2,4 D herbicide. Farmers said that RR corn, and the subsequent application of herbicide has affected their vegetables and fruit trees.

plant biomass that provide natural food and nutrient heavy rains caused heavy rainwater runoff from the build-up in the soil. Chemical fertilizers also create upland cornfields causing heavily silted water to flood an imbalance in the composition of the soil’s natural rice fields in the lowlands. nutrients. Excessive nitrogen in the soil for example causes acidity that leads to unavailability of some In Cordon, Isabela, the farmers complain of heavy nutrients, thus causing deficiency or to the solubility rainwater runoff from the cornfields planted with the of other nutrients which may lead to toxicity. These herbicide-resistant stacked variety particularly during then leache out other necessary nutrients in the soil the typhoon Quiel. Stones and rocks have begun to and eventually leads to soil nutrient imbalance. portrude when the topsoil eroded. In Banga, South Cotabato, the MAO also complained of soil erosion in The use of glyphosate (Roundup), increases the rate his corn farm. of soil infertility because it eliminates weeds down to its roots, hence eliminating the natural food for soil As a consequence, water bodies and rivers get heavily microbes that builds up soil nutrients. Meanwhile high silted. One corn farmer in Capiz said that soil eroded yielding varieties (HYVs) like hybrids, including GM from the denuded mountains where trees and forest corn, are heavy absorbers of inorganic fertilizers and vegetation had been replaced with the herbicide- other micro-nutrients in the soil. Pests are attracted to resistant GM corn. They said that pesticides used in these chemically enhanced and enriched plants. On growing GM corn found their way downstream to the the contrary, traditional corn varieties are generally coastal waters of Puentevedra, causing silt build-up pest-tolerant . and poisoning marine life. Fishes and prawns have become scarce in the once abundant fishing area. Soil erosion and landslides In San Fernando, Bukidnon, landslides in August 2011 Another effect of herbicide use in herbicide resistant were reported in areas planted with the stacked variety GM corn is loosening of the soil, making areas planted of GM corn. The Municipal Environment and Resources to GM corn prone to erosion and landslide. One farmer Officer (MENRO) also shared that they had difficulty complained that her rice field was destroyed when with reforestation projects in the hilly areas because of

50 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

With the use of glyphosate, a herbicide that kills weeds, the once inaccessible grassy hillsides are now quickly cleared and prepared for GM corn planting. Most of the hilly areas in Quinabonglan, Capiz are now planted with RR Corn. the spraying of glyphosate which killed all vegetation Table 28. Soil Loss for Various Land Uses by including tree seedlings in the immediate vicinity. Slope Category (t/ha), 2009. Slope Category There is a need to study the extent of expansion of Land Use herbicide resistant corn in forests or hilly areas. The 18-30 >30 once inaccessible areas are now easily being cleared Rice 50 100 out and prepared with the use of herbicides, which Corn with fallow 50 150 may lead to further inundation of forest and wildlife Other Agriculture 25 50 areas and contribute to the increase in soil erosion. Most of the hilly areas are planted with RR corn where Forest 1 1 before, these are under natural vegetation. Source: Bureau of Soils and Water Management

Corn farms in 2009 had the highest rate of soil loss at slopes of more than 30 degrees. About 150 tons of Food insecurity topsoil per hectare were lost in areas planted to corn at slopes more than 30 degrees. Fifty tons of topsoil per As a result of the loss of wild vegetables, including hectare is lost in corn areas with 18-30 degrees slope not being able to grow vegetables and root crops in (Table 28). or near GM corn farms, the regular diet of the farming families has been affected. Before, they did not have to There is supposedly an unpublished impact research buy vegetables because these used to be abundant in done by the ERDB of the DENR and funded by the USAID, their farms and they could plant them alongside corn but according to the ERDB, a more comprehensive fields. Now they have to buy even kangkong (water study is yet to be done on the GM corn impact on the spinach) and camote (sweet potato) tops. environment.

51 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Traditional white corn used for human consumption are contaminated with GM corn thru cross pollination, Echague, Isabela.

One important part of farmers’ diet lost to planting or “pasasalamat sa masaganang ani” (thanksgiving for GM corn is the glutinous white corn (kalimbugas) a bountiful harvest) where farmers gather together which farmers used to eat as an alternative staple or in and enjoy their bountiful harvest of white corn is also combination with rice. almost gone. In Bgy. Mindagat, Ka Max laments this culture has slowly disappeared with the introduction The farmers complain that they cannot eat the GM of hybrid corn in the late 1980s and early 1990s. corn as replacement for rice or white corn because of uncertainty of its side effects. GM corn leaves a bitter Feeding on toxins taste in the tongue, as observed by farmers. There are mixed responses from the farmers on the Before, the native corn could be mixed with rice, thus effect of eating GM corn or in handling the seeds when the farmers could save on rice. But they cannot do this planting and harvesting. anymore. And if they have nothing to eat, they risk eating the GM corn. All FGD respondents except for the farmers in Cordon, Isabela have experienced stomach pains, gas Table 29 provides a bird’s eyeview of the loss of pains, diarrhea, shortness of breath, chest pains and biodiversity and impact on farmers’ food security from coughing, itching, skin allergies and yellowing of skin planting GM Corn. after eating GM corn. Farmers have also experienced numbness of lips and tongue after eating boiled young Moreover, with the commercialization of GM corn, GM corn in cobs. certain cultural practices have also been lost, such as the practice of communal farming or bayanihan Farmers have observed that every time the GM corn (ammuyo in Ilocano, dagyaw in Ilonggo) where plants reach flowering stage, the incidence of asthma farmers help each other by working on each other’s attacks among the children increases. Children passing fields without pay. This takes place every land by flowering GM corn fields also experience coughing. preparation time. Also with the decreasing farmland Farmers doing the spraying of herbicides suffer from devoted to white corn and the decreasing number of headaches and shortness of breath as well as skin farmers planting white corn, the culture of “pasinaya” irritation.

52 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

Table 29. Impact of GM Corn on Environment and Biodiversity Resulting to Food Insecurity Case Areas Abundant Before GM Corn Scarce During GM Corn Impact on Environment Villa Rey, Echague, Wild boar, bananas - cordova, upland rice Wild vegetables and other edible Scarce vegetation, acidic soil, silted rivers, only Isabela plants do not grow anymore few fishes remain; tungro in rice and bananas; papaya fruits are deformed Caquilingan, Cordon, fish, vegetables, white corn All food even vegetables are bought Soil is easily eroded especially during the rainy Isabela from the market. season. Stones protrude out from the soil and the soil turns red and clayish. Corn leaves turn violet. Banaban, Bayambang, Ararawan or mole cricket (for food) used to be Vegetables, ararawan, black kohol, No more earthworms and other beneficial Pangasinan plenty, Liddeg or black kohol (usually cooked with guorami, Suso, field rats, mudfish, farm insects. ACB have become immune to coconut milk), gurami (Guorami), suso (edible river crab, white corn, fish became the Bt corn. The soil has lost its nutrients as snails), field rats (dagang bukid), mudfish (dalag), scarce. Almost all food is bought, increasing volumes of fertilizers are needed palakang bukid (field frogs), fish abound in rice even rice. to grow crops. fields, kamaro (similar to the mole cricket), white corn, gabi or taro, kamote (sweet potato), pechay, native chicken, talangka (river crab) Macayo-cayo, suso, black kohol, field rats, native catfish, taro, There are now few wild vegetables Soil is acidic and has hardened. Bayambang, kamoteng kahoy (Cassava), kamoteng gapang and fish is bought. Pangasinan (sweet potato) San Nicolas, San Vegetables and fishes, root crops, traditional rice Vegetables are no longer abundant. Corn Plant Hopper (CPH) or Waya-waya; Dionisio, Iloilo plus traditional white corn, native chicken Coconut, guava, rice field frogs , bananas do not fully develop; the soil guorami, catfish becomes dry, hard, and acidic; hilly portions of San Nicolas are already eroded Quinabonglan, Rice and white corn are staple of farmers who People now buy rice and only few Soil gets easily eroded as there are no weeds Maayon, Capiz were self-sufficient then. Vegetables and fruits vegetables are found; few fishes in and vegetation to hold the soil. Even trees are abound; rivers were teeming with fishes the rivers affected by glyphosate spraying; water supply has become scarce Carataya, Cuartero, Mountains and cliffs are covered with trees and Trees and vegetation have become Marine life is poisoned with agro-chemicals Capiz wild vegetation scarce run-off from the mountains; carabaos have become thin and sickly after eating corn fodder sprayed with Roundup; Growing cassava, camote and banana trees usually planted along rice paddy dikes is no longer possible Bungsuan, Dumarao, Vegetables, many trees before, and rivers were Vegetables, no more trees, rivers have Stem borer, stalk rot, stunted vegetables if Capiz abundant with water and fish dried up they survive RR spraying; soil erosion and rocks protruding out from the earth; water have become scarce, denuded hills and mountains Halapitan, San Native white corn Native white corn Landslide, soil erosion, no more vegetation Fernando, Bukidnon Mindagat, Malitbog, White corn White corn Traditional white corn gets cross-pollinated Bukidnon with GM corn; mangoes and bananas become sickly Cinco, Banga, South Kulitis or Chinese spinach (Amaranth), vegetables No more freshwater fishes, vegetables Pests in asparagus and durian; soil has Cotabato – string beans, legumes, eggplant, tomatoes, have become scarce and now bought become acidic and loose hence prone to soil freshwater fishes from the market; durian and bananas erosion have become sickly and infested South Sepaka, Kulitis or Chinese Spinach (Amaranth), saluyot or Bananas have become sickly and have CPH started in 2011 during the dry season; Bagumbayan, Sultan jute, wild bitter melon, bananas fewer leaves Kudarat Focused Group Discussions, February to March 2012

53 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

These side effects are known acute effects of List 1. Some Acute Health Effects of Pesticides agrochemicals. (See List 1)

Illnesses observed to have become prevalent even numb lips, tongue weakness, fatigue, lethargy among the young children are urinary tract infection sore throat dizziness (UTI), kidney and liver problems, high blood pressure blurred vision disorientation, confusion and diabetes, and among the elderly, cancer. Birth Lachrymation agitation defects have also occurred and have also become common like being born deaf or mute. These Headache inarticulate speech preliminary data needs to be verified under extensive Salivation depression health studies. No post monitoring is being done to nose bleed memory loss date to assess these problems (Table 30). Swelling difficulty in walking Previous studies have been conducted among the chest pain, tightness, wheezing anxiety, restlessness Lumads in Polomolok, South Cotabato where the suffocation, difficult breathing involuntary twitching first field testing of the Bt corn was done. The results Sweating hypotension, hypertension showed that the Bt toxin (Cry1Ac) was present in the Burning skin drop in blood pressure serum of blood samples taken from the Lumads, the Itching rapid pulse indigenous people, who complained of dizziness, nausea, and ill health after being exposed to the Blisters muscular pain, stiffness Bt corn. The findings however were rejected and discoloured irregular nails muscle weakness disregarded by the government and local scientists. nausea, vomiting back pain abdominal cramps seizures Despite such experiences, the government apparently has not provided nor programmed a post monitoring diarrhoea paralysis system to assess the impact of GM corn on human uncontrolled urination coma health. vaginal pain death (Pesticide Action Network-Asia and the Pacific, 2nd Edition, 2010) With plans to commercialize Bt eggplant and later on GM rice (i.e. Golden Rice) in the country, there is an urgent need for an extensive health safety testing Farmers in South Sepaka in Sultan Kudarat shared that and post release monitoring. The impact of consuming native chickens would always lay their eggs in one GM corn by farmers as well as on the livestock place. But once fed with GM corn, farmers noticed their must be established before any other GM crops, native chickens laid their eggs just anywhere. especially GM food, is released in the Philippines. The Philippine government, priding itself as model Farmers’ choice or left without a choice? country in biosafety, must exercise the ‘precautionary principle’, where until proven safe and until doubts The farmers have observed the various disadvantages are cast a product must not be tried, propagated and of GM corn from unrealized incomes leading to commercialized. bankruptcy and indebtedness, falling productivity, loss of biodiversity, environmental destruction, food Impact on livestock and poultry insecurity, and threat to health. But with the situation they are in, they are left without a choice but to Farmers have observed that livestock, especially goats continue planting GM corn. and cattle that eat GM corn leaves and stalks become sickly, suffering from diarrhea, while others have a The DA and various MAOs say that they are presently hard time defecating. Carabaos and cows have been pushing for and advocating organic agriculture observed to lose weight and are sickly. In Caquilingan, and encouraging farmers to go back to the cheaper Cordon, Isabela for example, five carabaos died in 2011 conventional hybrid yellow corn. However, with and when farmers examined the carabaos’ stomachs, the ease of growing GM corn, easy access to loans these were filled with undigested corn fodder. and massive information campaign by companies, farmers have preferred GM corn over conventional Farmers also complained that native chickens fed with corn varieties. GM corn contamination also affects the GM corn appeared disoriented and failed to lay eggs. seed-saving practice of farmers. Farmers report that

54 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

Table 30. Illnesses Observed by Farmers Associated With GM Corn Propagation Case Areas Illnesses in Humans Livestock and Poultry Villa Rey, Echague, Isabela Swollen lips after eating GM Corn, itchiness, stomach pains Carabaos die after eating too much GM corn fodder Caquilingan, Cordon, Isabela UTI even among children, ulcer, blood in urine Unexplained deaths of carabaos – five in 2011 after eating GM corn fodder Banaban, Bayambang, Pangasinan Itchiness especially when flowering stage, skin pruritis and Livestock that consume GM corn fodder get sickly. Goats have allergies; diarrhea, gas pains, stomach acids loose bowel movement while cows become thin. Macayo-cayo, Bayambang, Pangasinan Stomach pains, diarrhea None observed San Nicolas, San Dionisio, Iloilo Hypertension, diabetes, asthma Livestock have become thin because there are no more grasses or wild vegetation for them to eat. Quinabonglan, Maayon, Capiz Farmers observe increasing incidences of UTI, ulcers, kidney None observed problems. Carataya, Cuartero, Capiz None observed Carabaos that have eaten corn leaves and stalks that have been sprayed with glyphosate have loose bowel movement. Bungsuan, Dumarao, Capiz Goiter, stomach pains, difficulty in breathing, allergies Carabaos that have eaten the GM corn fodder have loose increase every flowering stage, hepatitis-B, those with bowel movement. One carabao eventually died, excreting illnesses are aggravated by eating GM corn blood a few days after eating GM corn fodder. Halapitan, San Fernando, Bukidnon Hypertension, diabetes, the skin of farmers and their families None observed that eat RR corn turn yellow (jaundice). Mindagat, Malitbog, Bukidnon None observed Swines and carabaos that get near the GM corn farms got sick. Cinco, Banga, South Cotabato Asthma and skin allergies especially during pollination, Goat livers have been observed to have become abnormal, hypertension, liver and kidney diseases carabaos get thin and sickly, and eventually die South Sepaka, Bagumbayan, Sultan Colds, fever, cough, asthma during flowering stage of the Native hens have become disoriented, laying eggs anywhere Kudarat GM corn Focused Group Discussions, February to March 20122

GM contaminated varieties are becoming non-viable, would be for selling and the second largely for saving therefore cannot be replanted. up for food and selling whatever is left.

Farmers who choose conventional or traditional corn Farmers have come to the collective realization of have to plant earlier than those who plant GM corn. the negative impact of planting GM corn on their However, they cannot risk planting the corn seeds on livelihood, incomes, environment, biodiversity, food wet soil as mud would clog the seed planting tool and security, and family health. The most bitter realization waste the seeds in the process. Many farmers also want is that they have become more indebted to the traders to plant the traditional white corn for additional food than ever before. And if farmers will not borrow for consumption but these would get contaminated with corn production, they will not be able to borrow for the GM corn. Farmers are anxious that the GM corn rice production and rice for consumption. would eventually eliminate the traditional white corn. Smallholder corn farmers had hoped that a new The lack of irrigation also leaves farmers in rainfed areas technology introduced by corporate agents and the without much choice but to plant corn which requires government would bring better harvests and incomes less water compared with rice. Farmers in Pangasinan and better lives, but much like the bitter taste of GM shared that if only their lands were irrigated, they corn, farmers have ended up deeper in debt and would plant rice instead of corn. The first cropping poverty.

55 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Livestock such as goats (for food) and cows (food and farm work) are being fed with Bt Corn stalks at Bayambang, Pangasinan.

56 IV. Evidence from the Ground MASIPAG

Endnotes

1 Key Informant Interview (KII) with the Municipal Agriculture Office, Cuartero, Capiz, March 13, 2012 2 KII with the Municipal Agriculture Office, Maayon, Capiz, March 13, 2012 3 KII, with Region XII RFU in Koronadal, General Santos City, March 26, 2012; KII, MAO, Echague, Isabela, February 28, 2012 4 KII, Mr. Milo de los Reyes, March 16, 2012 5 KII, MAO, Echague, Isabela, February 28, 2012 6 KII with contract grower for demonstration farm, San Dionisio, Iloilo. March 10, 2012 7 Ibid. 8 Various FGDs 9 KII with Region VI RFU in Iloilo, March 9, 2012 and FGD in Cuartero, Carataya, March 12, 2012 10 IBON-MASIPAG FGDs, February to March 2012 11 KII, Bgy Captain Amado T. Villacanas, Jr., March 24, 2012, Bgy Cinco, Banga, South Cotabato 12 La Filipina Uy Gongco Corp. is one of the biggest trading houses in Panay and Negros Islands involved in the trading of feeds ingredients, fertilizers, sugar, vegetable oils, grains and wheat flour. It also owns a sugar mill – the Capiz Sugar Central formerly the Elizaldes’, flour mills, animal feeds mills, livestock farms, cargo ships, hotels, housing, a shopping mall, and a bank. 13 From its establishment on June 29, 1982 through SEC Registration No. 121272, NABCOR has evolved to be a dynamic corporation responding to the needs and priorities of time. Originally from its mother corporation, the Strategic Investment Development Corporation (SIDCOR), an agency under the umbrella of the Office of the President, NABCOR was transferred to the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), and finally on August 09, 2005, NABCOR was transferred back to DA through another Deed of Assignment. 14 FGDs in Carataya, Cuartero, Capiz and in Mindagat, Malitbog, Bukidnon on March -- and --, 2012 15 FGD in Quinabonglan, Maayon, Capiz March 11, 2012 16 KII, Bgy, Kagawad Maximo Narvasa, March 23, 2012, Mindagat, Malitbog, Bukidnon 17 KII MAO, Echague, Pangasinan; BPI Bio-Tech Core Team 18 KII, BPI focal person for field monitoring; Approval Registry Of Regulated Articles For Propagation (As Of February 23, 2012), Bureau of Plant Industry 19 Memorandum from the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) Director Clarito M. Barron to Asst. Secretary Edilberto M. De Luna of the National Corn Program of the Department of Agriculture, August 22, 2011 on Banded Leaf and Sheath Blight 20 Ibid. 21 KII, Mr. Zaldy M. Boloron, Region 12 Regional Field Unit Officer of the Department of Agriculture, March 26, 2012 22 KII, Mayor Henry Ladot, Banga, South Cotabato, March 12, 2012 23 Pesticide Action Network-UK, December 1999; See also banned pesticides in the Philippines, Fertilizers and Pesticides Authority 24 KII, Bgy. Kagawad and Head of Bgy. Committee on Agriculture, ----, February --, 2012 25 See http://www.gardenguides.com/125742-organic-fertilizer-vs-inorganic-effects-environment.html, and http://www.malcolmbeck.com/ books/gv_method/FertilizerOrganicNaturalversusChemicalInorganic.htm 26 KII, Ka Pecs, MASIPAG, Region XII, March 26, 2012 27 FGD, Bgy. Halapitan, San Fernando, Bukidnon, March --, 2012

57 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

28 KII, Bgy. Kagawad, Caquilingan, Cordon, Isabela, February --, 2012 29 KII, MAO Jeffrey Esterella, Banga, South Cotabato, March 26, 2012 30 FGD, Bgy. Carataya, Cuartero, Capiz, March 12, 2012 31 KII, MENRO Henry Halina, San Fernando, Bukidnon, March – 2012. 32 KII with farmer leaders in Echague, Isabela an d Malitbog, Bukidnon, February 25, 2012 and March --, 2012 33 KII, BPI-Biotech Core Team, April 11, 2012 34 See also http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/A72C98BF-88CD-4BAA-9B0F-5BB709A0C564/0/glyphosate. pdf, factsheet developed by the Oregon State Universoty and Interfox, Incorporated. (…in a long-term feeding study, glyphosate caused changes in urine, increases in liver weights, decreases in body weight gain, and increases in the number of cataracts (damaged eye lens) and lens)

58 V. People’s Resistance MASIPAG

V. People’s Resistance

ASIPAG was borne out of the farmers’ fervent From the beginning, the introduction of GMOs into the desire to regain traditional rice varieties country has been met with widespread protests from Mwhich were lost to the modern technology of farmers. high-yielding varieties (HYVs) introduced during the Green Revolution. The network of farmers, nationalist Protests against Bt corn scientists and local non-government organizations has for more than twenty-five years worked towards As early as the late 90s, MASIPAG has been at the a holistic farming technology that not only conserves forefront to stop the field testing of Bt corn. MASIPAG the vast wealth of agrobiodiversity but honors and engaged in massive education and lobbying campaign enrich the inherent knowledge and wisdom of the to raise the awareness of farmers and policy-makers on farmers. the potential harm of the GM crop. Together with multi- sectoral alliances with farmer networks, scientists, Farmers have a collective responsibility in feeding consumers, academe and advocates, intensive the society, being stewards of the land and genetic lobbying were done to halt the Bt corn field trials in resources. To fulfill this huge task, farmers’ rights to Bay, Laguna and General Santos City, where local genetic resources, technology, land and decision- ordinances banning the field trials were successfully making should be respected and protected.1 passed. On August 29, 2001, more than 800 farmers, Genetically modified organisms violate theses rights, faith-based organizations, students, indigenous erode biodiversity and promotes the privatization and people, women, consumers and other sectors took control of Agrochemical TNCs over genetic resources part in the trampling of GM corn in the Agroseed and farmers’ livelihoods. experimental site in Tampakan, South Cotabato. It took them only three minutes to destroy all the GM corn

59 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

plants in the 1,700 square meter experimental site. led the lobbying, education and protest against Bt Agroseed is a branch of Monsanto in the Philippines. corn. In Central Mindanao, for instance, intense mass campaigns and the convening of multi-sectoral The uprooting was a fierce expression of the farmers’ alliances against development aggression resulted disgust and protest against the Bt corn, and yet it was to the approval of village-level resolutions and still approved for commercialization. Rather than be ordinances preventing the entry of Bt corn. On May doused and suppressed, MASIPAG realized the value 2004, around 1000 farmers, NGOs, scientists, church of a united, educated and empowered grassroots as groups rallied against the Monsanto office in General the better and more effective way to resist the ever- Santos City where they expressed their disgust at persistent and deceptive GM technology. Monsanto’s deceptive projects and actions, especially directed towards the agricultural sector. Local lobbying and banning of GM corn Box 4. Anti-GM corn Legislative Measures Despite strong resistance from the people, then • Several local government units (LGUs) supported secretary of the Department of Agriculture Leonardo the opposition and campaign against GMOs, Montemayor issued Administrative Order No. 8 in such as declaring their jurisdiction as “GMO- April 2002, which allowed and regulated the entry free”. Among the first to make such a declaration of GMOs as food, feed and processed product. Civil was the island province of Bohol, which on July society organizations filed a moratorium on the 21, 2004 passed Provincial Ordinance No. 2003- implementation of DA AO8. The group questioned 101. Otherwise known as the ‘Safeguard Against the legal procedures and safety measures as basis for GMOs,’ this ordinance prevented the entry of the approval of the commercialization of Bt corn, and GM plants, animals and microorganisms into held an indefinte hunger strike in front of the DA office. the province. Other provinces, such as Negros On May 9 2002, MASIPAG held a solidarity fasting Oriental and Negros Occidental declared wherein more than 1,500 farmer members from all the island of Negros as “organic island of the over the country did not eat for a day to express their Philippines”. The provinces of Marinduque and protest against the commercialization of Bt corn. In Mindoro Oriental also passed similar ordinances Visayas, MASIPAG was able to gather more than 7,000 against the entry of GM crops. 2 signatures calling for a moratorium of DA AO8. • A ban on Bt corn was declared in certain municipalities in the provinces of Bukidnon, Prior to the infamous DA AO 8, several other legislative Iloilo and Capiz. and judiciary actions were conducted. On February • In 2005, the DA in Iloilo banned Monsanto’s GM 21, 2000 charges were filed before the Supreme Court corn variety. against government officials and scientists responsible for the regulation of the field tests. The complainants also asked for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to MASIPAG farmer groups also actively involved other prevent the importation and planting of Bt corn, and sectors and formations to build or join alliances not the permit issued to the companies be nullified. only against GMOs but largely to protect farmers’ rights and the conservation of environment. In late 2003, Realizing the seeming failure of these national I-RESIST or Iloilo Resistance against GMOs was formed institutions to heed the call of peoples’ organizations, together with Paghugpong sang mga Mangunguma MASIPAG took inspiration in its farmer-led and sa Panay kag Guimaras (PAMANGGAS) – the Panay- empowerment principle to strengthen the community wide federation of farmers’ organizations and MASIPAG against the onslaught of Bt corn. Education and Visayas together with CADI as well as the Jaro Social capacity-building activities among the POs and Action Center (JASAC). The alliance maximized the use community leaders were conducted, equipping them of radio-hopping, television guesting, press releases with skills and building their confidence in undertaking and distribution of written paraphernalia on GMOs. local advocacy campaigns. Farmer leaders become effective in discussing the perils of GMOs, while at the Multi-sectoral alliances in Mindanao also played a same time emphasized the better option to pest and vital role in drumbeating the issue against GMOs diseases management – sustainable agriculture. and other environmentally-destructive projects and technologies. Campaigns were then decentralized to the regions and the provinces, where the farmers and their POs

60 V. People’s Resistance MASIPAG

Sustainable Agriculture versus the monocropping practices promoted thru GM corn propagation. The Kahublagan sang The most notable contribution of MASIPAG in the Mangunguma sa Capiz (KAMACA) has been active decade-long struggle against GMOs is the concrete in the campaign against GMOs and has promoted and sustainable agricultural practice that provides among its members sustainable agriculture strategies solution to the problems that GMOs are supposedly with MASIPAG-Visayas. addressing. For more than 25 years, MASIPAG farmers have developed a wide variety of pest and disease MASIPAG’s program of diversification and integration management systems that are ecologically sound farming system (DIFS) can effectively address the and are cost effective. Detasseling, observing proper alleged problems that GM corn is trying to solve. Various time for planting, use of certain IMOs are some of the cultural practices can help avoid pest infestation while recognized management practices to help lessen pest at the same time securing the food and some income attacks. MASIPAG farmers, who are trained to become for the family. Farmer-led breeding and selection, scientific in their approach to farming production, who contributes to the conservation and improvement of are confident in their inherent know-how are able to genetic resources like native white corn varieties. come up with appropriate solutions. MASIPAG acknowledges the long and difficult path For instance, Maximo Narvasa, an active MASIPAG to becoming totally GMO-free. For one, agrochemical farmer-leader in Mindagat, Malitbog, Bukidnon plant TNCs such as Monsanto will continue to use their two weeks ahead or two weeks later from the planting vast resources to influence, manipulate and deceive of GM corn to avoid contamination of their white governments, academics, scientists, farmers and corn. Along with other members of the Mindagat consumers that they need and they want GMOs. This Integrated Sustainable Farming Association or MISFA, paper should serve to expose the failures of GM corn they practice organic farming and SA, which includes and encourage the farmers to shift to more sustainable planting native white varieties of corn. Realizing the corn production. MASIPAG has previously published threat of GM corn in their farms, he filed a resolution “Selling Food, Health and Hope: The Real Story Behind as a barangay councilor banning GM corn in their Monsanto Corporation” exposing the lies of Monsanto barangay. Maximo and his group also tried to convince and the plight of countries that fell to the control of the Municipal Agriculturist Officer to exclude GM corn Agrochemical TNCs. in their program and strengthen organic farming promotion. Maximo chooses to practice sustainable Unwavering, Undefeated agriculture because he believes that the government’s food security thrust only seeks to produce food, To date, MASIPAG and other anti-GMO alliances are without ensuring its safety. actively campaigning against the field testing and eventual commercialization of two important crops in MASIPAG has also started the formation and protection the country, Bt eggplant and Golden Rice. of ecological islands in several remote areas – where traditional corn varieties will be conserved against May 2, 2012, the Supreme Court issued a Writ of contamination of GM corn through isolation. In 2006, Kalikasan (Writ of Nature) against GM eggplant field the MASIPAG Research and Ecological Farm was trials. Cases were filed in court by fellow petitioners established in San Dionisio, Iloilo which provided venue Greenpeace, MASIPAG, former Senator Orlando for farmers education on Sustainable Agriculture. Mercado, Puerto Princesa Mayor Edward S. Hagedorn, MASIPAG-Visayas concentrated on organizing and Rep. Teodoro Casiño, lawyers Harry Roque and Maria educating farmers on SA and applying it to solve Paz Luna, scientists Dr. Ben Malayang III of Silliman problems on pests. Meanwhile, traditional white corn University and Dr. Romeo Quijano of UP Manila, is being promoted in Leon and Alimodian in Iloilo, and Leo Avila of the Davao City Agriculturist’s Office, in Antique and Negros. Seven barangays in Alimodian Catherine Untalan of Miss Earth Foundation, and in Iloilo have been declared as biodiversity and GMO- activist-musician Noel Cabangon. The petition seeks free areas. The agriculture office in Alimodian does not legal remedy to the flawed regulatory system that has allow corporate technicians to promote GM corn to allowed the unhampered proliferation of dangerous farmers in their municipality. GMOs in the country.3 4

In Capiz, local farmers federations are campaigning The Writ of Kalikasan is sought to immediately halt the for diversified and integrated farming systems (DIFS) Bt eggplant field trials. The petition presses the need

61 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

to take precaution given the scientific uncertainties 5247 or “Genetically-Modified (GM) Food Labeling on the safety of GMOs. It puts to question the flawed Act” by Representative Teddy Casiño. In Davao City, a government regulatory process for approving resolution has been filed seeking to declare the city as GMOs and highlights the need for a genuine and GMO-free following the uprooting of Bt eggplants at comprehensive process of informing and consulting the UP Mindanao Campus in 2010 on orders of Mayor the public. The writ is sought to ensure that the Sara Duterte in Davao. The municipality of Sta Barbara health of the people and environment are protected in Iloilo and Brgy Pangasugan, Baybay, Leyte also before any GMOs are released into the open. The passed similar resolutions preventing the GMO field petition also seeks a continuing mandamus and trials in their area. temporary environmental protection order (TEPO) to stop the multi-location field trials and eventual The passage of the Philippine Organic Agriculture commercialization of the Bt eggplant.5 Act, Republic Act 10068 proved helpful in supporting the local organic agriculture movement vis-à-vis the Meanwhile, MASIPAG and anti-agrochemical TNCs campaign against GMOs. Citing RA 10068, organic alliance RESIST! are holding information dissemination agriculture practitioners and advocates lobbied for a campaigns on Bt eggplant and Golden Rice, ban on the use and importation of GMOs. During the conducting national and regional forums as well as National Organic Agriculture Congress held in Cebu legislative lobbying against GMOs. Two important last 2012, more than 1,700 participants unanimously House Bills await approval at the Philippine Congress, passed a resolution seeking for a ban on GMOs. The House Bill No. 2124 or otherwise known as the resolution also asked the national government to “GMO-free Food and Agriculture Act” authored by assess the impacts of GMOs in the Philippines. Representative Rafael Mariano, and House Bill No.

Endnotes

1 MASIPAG’s Statement on Farmer Rights, Adopted at a Workshop, Defend Farmers’ Rights from Threats of the Philippine Plant Variety Protection Act of 2002, Doña Jovita Resort, Laguna, Philppines, 2-4th August 2002 2 SUHAY, the official publication of MASIPAG, Januray 2004 3 “Legal remedy vs. GMO invasion sought: Greenpeace files writ of kalikasan asking SC to stop GMO talong field trials”, April 26, 2012, accessed at http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/ph/press/releases/Legal-remedy-vs-GMO- invasion-sought/ 4 Punay, Edu. “SC issues writ vs GMO eggplant”. The Philippine Star, May 15, 2012, accessed at http://www. philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=807126&publicationSubCategoryId=68 5 Greenpeace, April 26, 2012

62 Farmers poorer after ten years of GM Corn MASIPAG

Farmers poorer after ten years of GM Corn

or ten years, the Philippine government numerous peer-reviewed studies by scientists has banked on the principle that in order and experts stating that GMOs are unsafe for Fto address poverty and hunger, agricultural livestock and human consumption and harmful productivity must be increased with the use to the environment. Economic gains of farmers of modern technologies. The government, in from GMOs are uncertain. Numerous protests collaboration with TNCs and local businessmen were staged, raising public awareness and are one in voice that GMOs will be able to improve gaining support from different sectors including the lives and livelihood of corn farmers, increase local governments. Ten years after, GM corn yield and mitigate the effects of climate change. has completely changed the landscape of corn Such is the belief to the technology that GMOs farming in the country, in a negative way. are also promoted as one way for the country to achieve the Millennium Development Goals This study has falsified the claims of the Philippine (MDG) of halving poverty and reducing hunger. government and TNCs, of improved farmers’ Since 2002, a steady stream of GMO products has livelihoods and economy thru GMOs. Ten years of been flooding the farmers fields and eventually experience is long enough to conclude that GMO into our food systems. propagation and commercialization has further indebted and impoverished farmers and only But concerns regarding the effects of GMOs on benefited agrochemical TNCs, financier-traders human health and the environment had been and local officials by extracting super-profits from raised. These concerns are now being backed by them.

63 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

1. Effect on incomes, health and liver and kidney problems are observed environment. to be present and increasing since the introduction of GM corn. Acute allergic a. The various case areas studied mostly reactions to pesticides such as asthma, reveal bankruptcy of smallholder farmers difficulty in breathing, skin allergies and landless tenants who plant GM corn. and pruritis or swelling, chest pains, These are true especially for many who numbness, stomach pains associated are dependent on financier-traders for with gas pains, diarrhea, and headaches their GM corn production as well as the have also been experienced in all the case everyday needs of the family. areas. Likewise for livestock and poultry, deaths and increased susceptibility to GM crops need more fertilizers and inputs illness after consuming GM corn fodder to ensure yield. The increased use of are also observed. fertilizers and herbicides has only added to the costs of production of farmers d. The introduction of GM corn made a and defeated further the purpose of huge impact on the environment. Effects increasing income. Only a fraction of the such as soil erosion and landslides corn farmers are not indebted to trader- associated with the use of glyphosate financiers. Most often, farmers find other herbicide cannot be ignored. Soil acidity means to earn to offset expenses, as they and ageing are likewise common for all cannot rely on GM corn alone to provide the case areas. Emergence of new pests the needs of the family. and super weeds resistant to glyphosate has also been documented, which also b. Farmers cannot go into diversified triggered the use of more pesticides and food production, as GM corn farming herbicides. The increased use of chemical displaces common and alternative food inputs also negates the hype that GMO sources. Herbicide tends to kill all plants plants reduce the use of agrochemicals other than the RR corn. It also induces harmful to environment and contributing soil erosion thus taking away the health to climate change mitigation. of the soil. Even if they do not practice GM corn farming, farmers also need to consider the adjacent GM corn farms, 2. Operations of agrochemical transnational and its accompanying effects such corporations (TNCs), landlords, traders, as herbicide drift, pests and diseases local government, and corporate scientists that can affect their crop.Traditional in promoting GMOs propagation in the white corn production which used to country be an alternative staple of farmers has also diminished and is under threat of a. Agrochemical TNCs gained from the contamination by GMOs in many of introduction of GMOs in the country. They the case areas. Overall, food security of serve as the primary source of inputs for farmers has diminished. the production of GM corn. They supply the necessary inputs through the trader- c. Since corn is traditionally eaten, it is no financiers in the various provinces in the surprise that farmers and their families eat country who also serve as the primary GM corn. In all of the case areas studied, promoters of GM corn and inputs. They hypertension, diabetes, cancer, renal can dictate which seeds to plant and diseases as well as urinary tract infection, which inputs to use.

64 Farmers poorer after ten years of GM Corn MASIPAG

Agrochemical corporations have been successful in penetrating the local corn It has also aided in the introduction industry. They use sales agents and of GM corn by facilitating channels of corporate technicians to market GM corn communication between corporate to local communities. They bridge the agents and corn farmers at the barangay farmers to the financier-traders to buy the level or identifying corn farms for seeds and inputs. The TNCs strategy to demonstration and field testing of GM deceive farmers thru information drives, corn. LGUs also hold provincial corn variety branding, networking and other congresses to invite players in the marketing strategies has resulted in the industry as venues for encouraging more farmers’ adoption of GM corn use in the investments in the corn sector. country, even if they are not aware of the implications of using the product. The process in regulating and monitoring GMOs in the country remains vague and b. The traders and financiers also gained inadequate. The Philippine government to from GM corn business. Given that this day through the BPI and the NCBP has GM corn inputs are very expensive for remained evasive in making the process farmers, they can provide the inputs of GMO approval transparent, scientific, either on loan or cash basis. Traders then independent and which promotes public charge a monthly interest rate of five interest. The DOH and the DENR, both percent to as high as 15 percent. They crucial government agencies in the have guarantors who guarantee farmers regulation and monitoring of GMOs, have in order for the latter to get credit from yet to formalize its procedural guidelines. the traders. Guarantors have a cut in these It is quite appalling that about 67 GMOs varied levels of interest rates. Traders are already approved by the government, and guarantors extract usurious interest while clearly there is an absence of such incomes from the farmers from additional guidelines in the last ten years. These acts mark-up on prices on inputs which they show negligence in ensuring the health charge the farmers who borrow the and safety of the Filipino population and inputs. the environment.

These traders operate either in one Also, government support is either lacking municipality, province, regional or various or non-existent for farmers who want to regions, depending on their capacity to revert to traditional or organic farming. finance operations, and to a certain extent, Even with the Organic Agriculture Act political connections. Local government in place, there seems to be confusion officials benefit from the supply value among government units on how to chain of GM corn production as many of promote organic agriculture. them are also landed families and have established businesses in agricultural Although the government procures corn trading. products from farmers, it is not enough to compete with local traders. The local c. The government on the other hand, pricing and buying of corn products are is very accommodating with regards thus being monopolized by corn traders, to GMO adoption. Aside from very lax leaving farmers without choice but to rely regulatory processes on the approval of on them. GMOs for feeds or food, it is also providing GM seed subsidies to farmers.

65 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

3. Changes in the structures of ownership Farmers’ demands and control over the land, natural and genetic resources as results of planting Clearly, the impact of the introduction of GMOs GMOs. specifically GM corn, is not the modernization of agriculture or feeding the nation but opening a. Corn farmers’ indebtedness leads to their the Philippine market for endless profits by loss of control over decision-making Agrochemical TNCs. GM corn introduction processes in farming. Definitely, farmers benefits the few while effectively marginalizing have no control on what seeds to plant. the vast numbers of corn farmers. As corn farmers are now heavily reliant on seeds sold by traders, farmers have Today, many farmers are experiencing the no choice but to buy whatever is being negative impact of GM corn farming on their peddled by traders. Even if they want incomes, driving them deeper into indebtedness, to go back to planting other types of with many of them losing their land rights. Many corn varieties, they have no choice as do not own the land they till and hence are traders would deny loans for their corn doubly burdened with land rents and higher costs production and consumption needs. of production. Traditional seeds have become hardly available. GM corn contamination also affects the seed-saving practices of farmers, as This situation must be reversed in order to halt the farmers report that GM corn contaminated corn farmers’ deeper slide into hunger, poverty varieties are becoming non-viable and and landlessness. There is still time for action. We cannot be replanted. They are now losing in MASIPAG thus propose: these traditional seeds, some eventually abandoned planting traditional varieties 1. Termination of all GMO field tests and recall of of corn. Farmers are left with no choice GM seeds or products released in the market. but to stick with the GM corn seeds and their inputs. 2. That the public, especially small farmers, be given the right to information on the effects of Farmers also have no control over prices GMOs. An independent and full assessment of of their corn produce. Traders control the the impacts of GMOs on the socio-economic, price of inputs, and they also control the health, and environment should proceed for buying price of corn. Since most farmers the public to have an informed decision. That are indebted to the traders, they are GMO seeds and products should carry these always in a disadvantaged position. information and appropriately labeled.

Farmers’ lands, either inherited or 3. That an independent investigation be awarded through the government’s land conducted to review the process of reform program, are used as collateral in government regulation and monitoring obtaining loans from traders. The farmers, of GMOs in the country be sought. The many of which are agrarian reform investigation should determine if the beneficiaries, have already lost control adoption of GMOs were favored in return over their lands either to traders or their for personal gains such as additional project guarantors. Many end up as farm workers funding, personal perks, new positions, etc. in their own lands. Ultimately, GM corn The investigation should include persons contributes to the loss of the means of involved, conflict of interests, source of production. GM corn planting is a debt funding, and other pertinent information. trap for farmers.

66 Farmers poorer after ten years of GM Corn MASIPAG

4. Companies should be held accountable to corn industry. Government support for those the negative impacts brought by GMOs. who want to convert back to traditional or If found that the grounds are sufficient, organic farming should be existing. Support Filipino farmers and consumers should seek should be given to small scale farming that legal remedy against Agrochemical TNCs, use biodiversity and agroecological systems including the Philippine government, for to attain food security and sovereignty. putting the health of the Filipino people and Government should do away with the the environment at risk. Agricultural farms chemical, capital and GMO-intensive and and the immediate environment exposed “business-as-usual” type of agriculture. to GMOs and accompanying chemicals should be rehabilitated and restored. Just Beyond the destructive practice of GMOs and compensation to farmers whose corn farming chemical farming on their livelihoods and activities was affected due to contamination, incomes, farmers also face the lack of control or whose health was affected due to over the lands and resources. Many farmers are consumption or exposure to GMOs. still landless despite government’s claims of achievement under its defective land reform 5. Enactment of legislation that safeguards the program. Coupled with landlessness is farmers’ right of farmers and the consumers against lack of access to support subsidies such as the effects of GMOs. Protection of farmer’s capital, credit and inputs that would help them rights to seeds and technology. improve their livelihood to free themselves from indebtedness to traders and financiers. 6. Promotion of Sustainable Agriculture as an Therefore, a genuine comprehensive agrarian alternative to chemical farming to ensure reform program should be implemented along food self-sufficiency and alleviating livelihood with other programs to ensure sustainability of of practitioners. Safe and sustainable corn beneficiaries’ land ownership. farming practices should be promoted to encourage farmers to veer away from In sum, much remains to be achieved in the chemical/GM corn farming. Promotion of people’s struggles against GMOs in the country. farmer-led breeding for the farmers to reclaim But the small farmers’ role in sustaining and their control over seeds and technology. preserving traditional knowledge, preserving and propagating the seeds remains as the core 7. Improve the country’s grains marketing and future of all our struggles against GMOs and trading system to remove cartels and and against corporate control over Philippine monopolies. Increase the government’s corn agriculture. procurement to further strengthen the local

Appendices MASIPAG

Appendices

APPENDIX 1: List of Respondents/Key Informants Interviewed Office Government Official Interviewed Date Interviewed Department of Agriculture Biotechnology Program Office Dra. Candida Adalia, Head 20-Mar-12 Corn Program Mr. Milo D. delos Reyes 16-Mar-12 Head, Secretariat of Corn Program Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority Pesticide Division Mr. Augusto Canlas 10-Apr-12 Deputy ED for Pesticides, Head of Bio-tech Core Team of FPA Ms. Aida V. Ordas, Chief 4-Apr-12 Bureau of Plant Industry Bio Tech Office Thelma Soriano, Head 11-Apr-12 Focal person for Field Monitoring 11-Apr-12 Bureau of Soils and Water Management Rodel Carating, Senior Science Research Specialist, Integrated Soil 20-Mar-12 Resources Information Service (ISRIS) Bureau of Animal Industry Dr. Efren Nuestro, Director 28-Mar-12 Animal Feeds Standard Division Dr. Angel Mateo, Chief 28-Mar-12 DA-Region VI Ricardo B. Saltin, Corn Coordinator 9-Mar-12 DA-Region X Larry E. Paraluman, Corn Coordinator 19-Mar-12 DA-Region XII Zaldy M. Boloron, Corn Coordinator 26-Mar-12 DOST, Office of the Undersecretary for R&D Ms. Julieta Fe L. Estacio 19-Apr-12 Project Devt Officer IV, DOST Secretariat, NCBP and DOST Biosafety Committee and Focal Point, BCH-Pilipinas Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Research Development Bureau Ms. Vera Sinohin 11-May-12 Dr. Carmelita Villamor 11-May-12 National Agribusiness Corporation-NABCOR Maria Jayd-da Mayoralgo, VP 20-Apr-12 Philippine Association Of Feed Millers, Inc. Ms. Ely Miranda 16-Apr-12 Institute of Plant Breeding-UPLB Dr. Artemio Salazar, former IPB Deputy Director 30-Mar-12 Municipal Agriculture Offices Echague, Isabela Mr. Ernesto B. Mabassa Bayambang, Pangasinan Mr. Delfin Bravo 29-Feb12 Ms. Mercedes Peralta, Corn Coordinator 29-Feb12 Mr. Eduardo Angeles, Agricultural Technician 29-Feb12 Maayon, Capiz Ms. Adelia Daypalan, and the Coordinators for the Rice and Corn 12-Mar-12 Programs Cuartero, Capiz Mr. Benjamin A. Gutierrez 13-Mar-12 Dumarao, Capiz Rice Program Coordinator 13-Mar-12 Malitbog, Bukidnon Ms. Judith S. Saguinhon 23-Mar-12 Banga, South Cotabato Mr. Jerry A. Estrella 26-Mar-12

69 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

APPENDIX 1: List of Respondents/Key Informants Interviewed Office Government Official Interviewed Date Interviewed Municipal Environment Office San Fernando, Bukidnon Mr. Henry Halina 21-Mar-12 Provincial Councilor Isabela Hon. Marcelino Espiritu 23-Feb-12 Echague, Isabela Hon. Bobot Castillo Mayor’s Office Maayon, Capiz Hon. Wilfredo Borres, Sr. 12-Mar-12 Malitbog, Bukidnon Hon. Aida B. Dela Rosa 23-Mar-12 Banga, South Cotabato Hon. Henry L. Ladot 26-Mar-12 Barangay Officials Villa Rey, Echague, Isabela Mr. Sabino Vicente 22-Feb-12 Caquilingan, Cordon, Isabela Bgy. CouncilorErlinda Agustin Valerio 25-Feb-12 Banaban, Bayambang, Isabela Bgy Captain Franco Macaraeg, Bgy Councilor Fortuna - Committee on 26-Feb-12 Agriculture Macayo-cayo, Bayambang, Isabela Bgy Councilor Mario - Committee on Agriculture, Bgy. Councilor Joseph 28-Feb-12 Bautista San Dionisio, San Nicolas, Iloilo Bgy. Captain Rogelio Bernal 9-Mar-12 Quinabonglan, Maayon, Capiz Bgy. Captain Rogelio dela Cruz, Bgy. Councilor Ferdinand Tumlos 11-Mar-12 Carataya, Cuartero, Capiz Bgy. Captain Melvin E. Cocjin 12-Mar-12 Bungsuan, Dumarao, Capiz Bgy. Councilor Josefina Reymundo 14-Mar-12 Halapitan, San Fernando, Bukidnon Bgy. Captain Norberto I. Catalan 21-Mar-12 Nacabuclad, San Fernando, Bukidnon Bgy. Captain Henry G. Camaling 21-Mar-12 Mindagat, Malitbog, Bukidnon Bgy. Captain Dionesio D. Kelim 23-Mar-12 Bgy, Councilor Maximo Narvassa, Bgy. Agriculture Officer 22-Mar-12 Cinco, Banga, South Cotabato Bgy. Captain Amado T. Villacanes, Jr. 24-Mar-12 South Sepaka, Bagumbayan, Sultan Kudarat Bgy. Captain Audy Anthony Gaucho 25-Mar-12

70 Appendices MASIPAG

Appendix 2: Profile of Case Areas

Bgy. Villa Rey is approximately 24 kilometers from not implemented. In some cases, tenants would pay 5 the Centro Poblacion of the Municipality of Echague, sacks of palay as rent and 20% of their total profit from Isabela – one of the top corn producing municipalities planting corn at no cost to the landowner. in Isabela. Secondary source of livelihood and income is rope- Based on its 2008 barangay profile, Villa Rey has an making, which is a household affair where all the approximate land area of 1,044.76 hectares, 70% household members are involved. Other sources of of which is hilly and only 30% is lowland. Its total income are food vending like rice cakes, soya curd, and agricultural land is 425.05 hectares (40.68% of total), of mini stalls of meat and vegetable. which, 345 hectares (500 hectares according to farmers interviewed) or 81.12% is devoted for corn production Farmlands in Bgy, Banaban are not irrigated. Water is with an annual yield of 2.7MT. Other crops are banana sourced from deep wells that every household has. (50 has.), vegetables (22.5 has.), and palay (7.8 has.). At the time of the field research, there were parcels of land Bgy. Macayo-cayo of the Municipality of Bayambang planted to pineapples. The average farm size is between in Pangasinan has seven sitios which are formerly 1 to 4 hectares. haciendas owned by the Ulanday, Tupas and Angeles families. Farming is the primary source of income where 78.41% of the population are engaged in farming. Employed Majority of the farmers are smallholders where average work follows next comprising 18.18% of its working farm size is 5,000 square meters (sq.m) or 0.5 hectare. population. The rest are self-employed. Most are title holders. Eighty percent of the farmers are agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) while the rest Purok 2 in Bgy Caquilingan, Cordon, Isabela is about acquired their lands through inheritance. About 30% 600 hectares. Bgy Caquilingan has more than 1,000 are farm workers, while 70% of the total number of households. Farming is the primary livelihood, where farmers own their lands. the main crops are corn and palay. Thirty percent of the population are contractual laborers, 25% are farm Primary source of income is farming, notably rice and laborers and 5% are into carpentry and engage in corn, intercropped with vegetables like legumes, housework. The rest are under regular employment, tomatoes, ampalaya and eggplant. All households in have their own small business like restaurants, the barangay have their own backyard livestock and vulcanizing shops, etc. Other sources of income include poultry. Some 70% of the farmers work on rope making gold panning, livestock and poultry raising, buy and sell during lean months. Other sources of income are from business. food vending and managing sari-sari stores.

Majority of the farmers are smallholder farmers but Bgy. San Nicolas, San Dionisio, Iloilo, has an area of remain without titles due to an ongoing legal battle. 380-hectares with slightly sloping terrain. Farming is Average size of farm is one to two hectares. the primary source of income. The primary crop is corn and rice is secondary. Mungbean and other vegetables Bgy. Banaban, Bayambang, Pangasinan has 1,634 including root crops (camote and cassava) and tubers population. Farming is the primary source of income (peanuts) are also planted. with palay and corn as the main crops. Mungbean is also planted as a third crop but only when the farmers Other sources of livelihood is contractual work, such as have capital. construction work (Php150-200/day), stevedoring in quarries (Php200 per cubic meter), firewood gathering Majority of the farmers are leaseholders and tenants. (Php8.00 per bundle), and charcoal making (Php100- Only 5-10% own lands; 90% are farm workers, of which, 130 per sack). 50% are either tenants or leaseholders. Farm workers are normally paid Php150 a day. Sharing system between Majority (90%) are smallholder farmers while the rest the land owner and the tenants is normally 12 cavans are farm workers. About 10% of the smallholder farmers to 20 cavans per cropping. The landlord-tenant relation lease their lands. The average farm size is one to 1.5 is only implemented for palay cropping while during hectares; 300 sq.m. is the smallest while the biggest is the second crop which is corn, the sharing system is two hectares. Corn area covers some 55 hectares, rice

71 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

lands cover about 30 hectares, while lands classified as the total farming population. Smallholder farm lot in timberland cover more than 100 hectares. Majority of Cuartero is one hectare on the average – 3 hectares is the farmers own their home lots. the highest and the 1/8 hectare is the smallest.

Bgy. Quinabonglan in Maayon, Capiz covers 980 About half of the total land area of Carataya or 4,000 hectares of largely hilly agricultural lands. A total of hectares was previously owned by a certain Ed Abalo 188 households reside in the Qionabonglan. It has and distributed to the farmers under PD No. 27 and five sitios, Cabanbanan, Mainoswagan, Mahidaiton, later on under the CARP. Agloy-a, Mabinoligon-Proper. Bgy. Bungsuan, Dumarao, Capiz occupies a total land In Mabinoligon Proper, 90% of the farmers own the area of 1,660.26 hectares, with a population of 4,282 or farms they till ranging from 1-3 hectares. The lands 10.05% of Dumarao’s total population in 2007. It has were awarded to them through CARP. The average 856 households and is about eight kilometers from the farm size is 1 to 3 hectares with the majority owning town proper. Bungsuan has eight sitios. 3 hectares, mostly titled and with Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOA). The rest are tenants and farm The main economic activity is farming and trading workers, as there are still families with 20 to 40 hectares agricultural products. Vegetables and root crops from landholdings. Sharing arrangements between tenant Bungsuan and nearby barangays of Agsirab Traciano, and landowner varies, such as harvest sharing (7 sacks and San Juan are hauled for sale to Roxas City, Kalibo and tenant:1 sack landowner) or tenants pay the land Iloilo City. Production is year-round while harvesting owners Php1,500-2,000 per hectare. and trading are done weekly.

Farming is the primary source of livelihood. About Corn areas, according to the farmers, make up about 98% in Sitio Proper plant corn while 50% plant rice. 1,000 hectares. Lands owned by the landlords are Vegetables, root crops and banana are planted for usually planted to sugarcane. Vegetables are also consumption and the surplus is for selling. Livestock widely cultivated. and poultry are also raised. Small-scale mining is also a secondary source of livelihood. The Bureau of Animal Industry animal stock farm, which comprises 585 hectares of Bungsuan, has 222 Bgy. Carataya, Cuartero, Capiz covers 8,000 hectares, households and 95% are engaged in farming. The land largely forest areas. It is 25 kilometers from the awarded to the farmers in 1989 was the result of the Poblacion in Cuartero. It comprises seven sitios, namely farmers’ occupation of the stock farm that was formerly Carataya Proper, Dumalagan, Kinanat-Ulo, Implamon- owned by the BAI but only served as grazing lands for an, Serapian, Agbulao, and Tambobo. the rich families’ cattle.

Total population is 1,313 with 315 households and The average size of lands owned by the farmers within 334 families. In Carataya Proper, there are at least 25 the stock farm is 1/8 hectare to 1.5 hectares. The households. farmers have not paid arrears to the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) because to this day the lands are yet Primary source of livelihood is farming, with corn as to be measured and assessed by the bank. Neither major source of income. All farmers plant corn mostly in has there been any tax declaration issued them by the the upland and hilly portions of Carataya that comprise Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR). Of the total 585 50% of Carataya’s land area. Palay accounts for 20% hectares supposed to be awarded the farmers, only of the land area and forest lands comprise about 10% 465 hectares were granted. According to the DAR, the while the rest comprise homelots and vacant cogonal BAI will develop 120 hectares of the stock farm as a areas. university. There are also areas in other sitios covered by CARP. Meanwhile, there are still landlords occupying Other crops planted are string beans, squash, coconut, about 20 to 200 hectares. and mahogany. Off-farm work are carpentry, as farmworkers, and as government employees. Farmers Bgy. Halapitan, San Fernando, Bukidnon has a total are also into livestock and poultry-raising – carabao, land area of 6,162.10 hectares and composed of 14 cattle, swine, goats, chicken, and ducks. sitios. Its main sitio, Sitio Poblacion, is further subdivided into 11 puroks. Total alienable and disposable lands Only about 30% of the farmers own their farmlands comprise 1,501.12 hectares while forest lands cover while 70% are tenants. Farm workers comprise 15% of 4,660.85 hectares. About 2,597 farmers till 1,200

72 Appendices MASIPAG hectares of forest lands. About 976 families are owner- The municipality of Banga is fertile. Banga sandy operators of their farmlands while about 617 families loam is the dominant soil type in the municipality, are tenants. followed by Faraon clay and Matutum sandy loam. Due to the intrinsic qualities of the soil, such as Corn is planted to some 1,030 hectares while rice is chemical composition, biological contents and planted to 540 hectares of land. Next to corn and rice, physical characteristics, majority of the land is suitable banana is also widely planted. Most of the agricultural for agriculture, of which 45% is planted to corn that products as well as farm inputs such as fertilizers, according to local government officials is GM corn. Rice chemicals, certified seeds, farm implements, etc. are is the secondary crop covering 32% of total agricultural sold or brought to Sitio Poblacion, Valencia City and land. Of the potential irrigable area, only 23.33% is Cagayan de Oro City. irrigated.

The Mayor of San Fernando and the family of a certain There are five rice mills and eight multi-purpose drying Mr. Ravago were identified by the farmers as owning facilities in Banga. White corn produced in Banga finds large tracts of agricultural lands. its way to a corn mill in General Santos City where it is milled into corn grits for human consumption. White Bgy. Mindagat is one of the 11 barangays of Malitbog, corn and GM corn production in Banga is traded in Bukidnon, located at the northernmost part of Koronadal City; Polomolok, General Santos City; Davao Malitbog. It has a total land area of 1,745 hectares, 77% City, and Cagayan de Oro City. Value of yellow corn are alienable and disposable and the remaining are production in 2010 was at Php886 million and white forest lands. corn production at Php121 million. GM corn production was valued at Php102 million. Its soil type is mountain soil undifferentiated and is suitable for high value perennial crops as well as rice Primary crops are rice and corn, and banana and coconut and corn production. It is rich in minerals such as are also widely planted. Banana contract farms by Dole chromite and volcanic slabs. Stanfilco are in Bgy. Cinco. Cassava and turnip and other fruits are also propagated. Corn farmers are also About 1,408.23 hectares of Mindagat suffer from contracted as seed growers by agents of foreign seed moderate erosion while 117.19 hectares is under severe companies, primarily Pioneer Hi-Bred and Evogene. erosion. Only 21 hectares are irrigated and planted to rice. Some 659 hectares are planted to corn, roots crops Bgy. South Sepaka, Bagumbayan, Sultan Kudarat and upland rice. comprises 8,164 hectares, most of which are forest lands and only about 119 hectares are rice and corn Mindagat depends on cattle or carabao in plowing the farms. Corn farms comprise 80% of total rice and corn field for crop production. About 29% or 118 households areas. Sixty percent of the farmers plant corn. The rest have access to draft animals for land preparation while plant rice although they also plant corn from time to the remaining 71% or 291 households use either time. the traditional tools or rent draft animals in the area. Livestock and poultry are raised by majority of the South Sepaka is formerly part of the municipality of households. Sto. Niño, South Cotabato. Geographically, it is closer to South Cotabato than it is to Sultan Kudarat. The bridge Fifty percent of the total agricultural production is sold traversing Hala River serves as the boundary between to the market. About 85% of farmers’ produce is bought Sto. Niño, South Cotabato and Bagumbayan, Sultan by traders and sold to major buyers and processors Kudarat. while 15% is sold to direct buyers such as households for consumption or sari-sari stores. Major marketing Farmers also plant vegetables, such as string beans, outlets for Mindagat are Cagayan de Oro City and legumes, cassava, squash, and eggplant. Banana Tagoloan while the minor marketing outlet is in Bgy. growers are contracted by Dole Stanfilco who leases Poblacion, Malitbog, Bukidnon. their lands for a period of 15 years.

Bgy. Cinco, Banga, South Cotabato has a total land Each of the farming families maintains at least 10 area of 2,413 hectares and one of the 22 barangays coconut trees for their own use. Vegetables are primarily of Banga, South Cotabato, which is touted as the corn planted for the household’s consumption and traded capital of the Philippines. One of the corn drying and only when there is surplus. milling facilities of the NABCOR is located in Bgy. Cinco.

73 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

APPENDIX 3 Table 1: Summary of GM Corn Cost of Production, Major Items, Cash Basis

ISABELA PANGASINAN ILOILO Quinabonglan, ITEMS Villa Rey, Caquilingan, Banaban, Macayo-cayo, San Nicolas, San Maayon Echague Cordon Bayambang Bayambang Dionisio (smallholder farmer) Labor 12,950 10,500 - 11,700 16,800 4,575-5,700 5,240 - 5,440 7,885 - 8,455 Inputs Seeds 9,000 8,000 13,500 /a 9000 9,000 9,000 Fertilizers 9,960 10,200 - 10,800 14700 26,000 - 28,600 20,010-20,800 14,280

Herbicides 1,400 4,100 740 0 2,645-3,095 /c 1,920-2,200 Rent Land Dryer 150 426 Equipment plus Labor - Power spray 0 - 350 - Tractor, baby tractor 5,400 4,000 - Farm animal + labor 1,200 2,700 900 400 /b 600-900 1,200 - Thresher 2,000 3,300 1,800 1,092 - Sheller 1,440 /d 2,400 Auxillary - Gasoline for irrigation 8,000 3,300 - 7,400 - Gasoline for power spray 0- 60 - Rice hull 400

- Diesel (krudo) 500 - Transportation cost 500 2,130 - 7,100 - Commission fees 1,000 2,875 - Sack 1,000 3,000 3,600 2,775 1,800 1,400 - Twine 60 - Food 5,600 6,890 5,400 1,600 1,400 TOTAL COST 43,110 49,900-52,110 70,840 53,242 - 62,667 43,610 - 45,350 42,941 - 48,761 TOTAL GROSS INCOME 38,850 (3,700kls * 55,000 (100 cavs * 90,000 (150 Cavs * 65,520 (91 Cavs * 37,500 (3,000kls * 42,600 (71 Cavs * P10.50/kl) if dried 50kls * P11/kl) 50kls * P12/kl) 60kls * P12/kl) P12.50/kl) 50kls * P12/kl) kernels, 44,400 (100cavs * 52kls/ cav * P9/kilo) if on cobs TOTAL NET INCOME (4260) - 8,840 2,890 - 5,100 19,160 2,853 - 12,278 (7,850) - (6,110) (6,161) - (341) NET INCOME RANGE* (4,260) - 8,480 2,890 - 5,100 19,160 2,853 - 12,278 (7,850) - (6,110) (6,280) - (341) /h

74 Appendices MASIPAG

CAPIZ BUKIDNON SOUTH COTABATO SULTAN KUDARAT Carataya, Cuartero ITEMS Bungsuan, Halapitan, San Mindagat, (smallholder Cinco, Banga South Sepaka Dumarao Fernando Malitbog farmer) Labor 12,360-13,600 17,580 - 20,030 14,400-14,480 8,460 - 11,060 6,410 - 7,728 6,600 Inputs Seeds 8,400 8,600-9,100 7,400 7,000-8,000 3,800** - 8,000 7,900 Fertilizers 12,750 11,240 15,620 12,450 13,000 12,800

Herbicides 2,660-3,660 /e 3,300-4,500 3,000 1,800 2,380 - 2,580 1,950-2,100 /g Rent Land Dryer 100 116 Equipment plus Labor - Power spray 800 200 - 700 - Tractor, baby tractor 3,200 1,200 - 1,600 - Farm animal + labor 1,000-1,200 1,200 1,000 - 2,000 1,440 600 1,800 - Thresher - Sheller 4,000 5,040 1,332 1,225-1,750 Auxillary - Gasoline for irrigation - Gasoline for power spray - Rice hull

- Diesel (krudo) - Transportation cost 3,360 1,670 - 1,720 1,739 6,650 675- 1080 750-1,500 - Commission fees - Sack 2,600 2,964 1,160 - Twine 35 - Food 600 4,200 860 700 - 1200 TOTAL COST 48,530-50,970 57,349-61,549 45,451-46,531 40,501-45,126 30,765 - 37,388 33,000-34,300 TOTAL GROSS INCOME 60,000 (60 Cavs * 63,840 (76 Cavs * 59,400 (90 Cavs * 35,000 (3,500kls * 37,908 (135 Cavs 41,250 (150 Cavs * 80kls * P12.50/kl) 70kls * P12/kl) 55kls * P12/kl) P10/kl) cobs * 54kls * 55kls * P5/kl) P5.20/kl)

TOTAL NET INCOME 9,030 - 11,470 2,291-6,491 /f 12,869 - 13,949 (10,126) - (5,501) 520 - 7,143 6,950 - 8,250 NET INCOME RANGE* 9,030 - 11,470 2,291-6,491 12,869 - 13,949 (10,126) - 6299/i (1,455.60) - 7,143/j 6,950 - 8,250 /a equivalent to three bags of seeds at 10 kilos each bag /b at minimum cost when corn farmers do not have enough resources, they utilize cows and labor to prepare the corn farms /c includes Php25 rodenticide, zinc phosphide /d shelling and drying /e includes pesticide Marshall at Php440 /f most times, the corn farmers borrow from financier-traders their consumption of rice for six months from land preparation to harvesting. Hence they net a negative balance of Php6,859-11,059 by harvest time /g includes pesticide Solomon, Php750 for the corn hopper pest (CHP) or waya-waya /h variance in income depends if farmer uses solar or mechanical dryer /i income may increase if corn is sold at Php13/kilo; Php46,800 (3,600kls*P13/kl). Net income is Php1674 - Php6299 /j income may decrease if traders shave 5 - 7 kilos per sack. Gross income would be Php35,942.20. Net income would be (1445.60) - (297.60) *Range of cost depending on land type,rent or other ranges in expenses. Computation tables are with the publisher. ** used ‘ukay-ukay’ or mixed seeds

75 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

Table 2: Summary of GM Corn Cost of Production, Major Items, Loan Basis

ISABELA PANGASINAN ILOILO ITEMS Villa Rey, Caquilingan, Banaban, Macayo-cayo, San Nicolas, San Echague Cordon Bayambang Bayambang Dionisio Labor 12,950 11,900 – 11,600 16,800 4,775-5,900 6,288 - 6,528 Inputs Seeds 10,500 10,000 15,000 /a 10,000 – 11,000 10,800 Fertilizers 13,100 12,900 – 13,500 15,750 33,000 - 39,600 24,012-24,960

Herbicides 1,600 5,200 740 0 3,174-3,714 /c Rent Land Dryer 150 Equipment plus Labor - Power spray 0 - 350 - Tractor, baby tractor 5,400 4,000 – 6,000 - Farm animal + labor 1,200 2,700 900 400 /b 720-1,080 - Thresher 2,000 3,300 1,800 1,092 - Sheller 1,728 /d Auxillary - Gasoline for irrigation 8,000 3,365 - 7,548 - Gasoline for power spray 0- 60 - Rice hull

- Diesel (krudo) - Transportation cost 500 - Commission fees 1,000 2,875 - Sack 1,000 3,000 3,600 2,775 2,160 - Twine 60 - Food 5,600 6,890 5,400 1,600 Interest on loan 10,470 5,500 – 5,740 8,320 9,273-11,629** 8,147-8,495** /e Mark-up* 4,840 4,900 – 5,800 3,600 7,600-8,600 TOTAL COST 58,420 62,600-63,550 81,710 61,507-76,015 51,757 - 53,845 TOTAL GROSS INCOME 38,850 (3,700kls * 55,000 (100 cavs * 50kls 90,000 (150 Cavs * 50kls 65,520 (91 Cavs * 60kls 37,500 (3,000kls * P10.50/kl) if dried * P11/kl) * P12/kl) * P12/kl) P12.50/kl) kernels, 44,400 (100cavs * 52kls/cav * P9/kilo) if on cobs TOTAL NET INCOME (19,570) - (6,830) (8,550) - (7,600) 8,290 (10,495) - 4,013 (16,345) - (14,257) NET INCOME RANGE* (19,750) - (6,830) (9,150) - (7,000)/i 8,110 - 8,290 (10,495) - 4,013 (16,345) - (14,257)

76 Appendices MASIPAG

CAPIZ ITEMS Quinabonglan, Maayon Quinabonglang, Carataya, Cuartero Carataya, Cuartero Bungsuan, Dumarao (smallholder farmer) Maayon (tenant) (smallholder farmer) (tenant) Labor 8,660 - 9,720.60 8,001.30 - 9,057.90 13,432-14,920 10,216 - 10,900 17,580 - 20,030 Inputs Seeds 11,160-11,880 11,160-11,880 10,320 10,320 10,440-12,420 Fertilizers 19,195.20 - 20,433.60 19,195.20 - 20,433.60 16,500 16,500 13,608-15,849

Herbicides 2,728-3,696 2,728-3,696 3,432-4,632 /f 3,432-4,632 /f 3,996-6,115.50 Rent Land 6,300 51,000*** Dryer 528.24-562.32 475.56-487.08 1,520 Equipment plus Labor - Power spray 960 960 - Tractor, baby tractor - Farm animal + labor 1,488-1,584 1,488-1,584 1,200-1,440 1,200-1,440 1,200 - Thresher - Sheller 2,400 2,400 4,000 714.2 5,040 Auxillary - Gasoline for irrigation - Gasoline for power spray - Rice hull 620-660 620-660

- Diesel (krudo) 496-528 496-528 - Transportation cost 2,641.20 - 9,372 1,845 - 6,150 4,032 806.4 1,670 - 1,720 - Commission fees - Sack 1,736-1,848 1,736-1,848 3,120 3,120 2,964 - Twine 35 - Food 1,736-1,848 1,736-1,848 720 720 4,200 Interest on loan 8,611.20-11,665.60** 9,061.56-12,266.08** 7,134-7,602** 5,992.40-6,326.40** 4,674-8,914.50** Mark-up* 1,480-1,800 1,480-1,800 1,400 1,400 230-630 TOTAL COST 53,388.64 - 64,892.52 58,181.06 - 66,872.58 57,716-60,644 98,988.60 - 101,112.60 62,253-71,093.50 TOTAL GROSS INCOME 42,600 (71 Cavs * 50kls 36,900 (61.5 Cavs * 60,000 (60 Cavs * 80kls 12,000 (12 Cavs * 80kls 63,840 (76 Cavs * 70kls * P12/kl) 50kls * P12/kl) * P12.50/kl) * P12.50/kl) * P12/kl) TOTAL NET INCOME (22,293) - (10,788.64) (29,972.58) - (644) - 2,284 (86,988.60) - (7,253.50) - 1,587 /g (21,281.06) (89,112.60) NET INCOME RANGE* (22,293) - (10,788.64) (30,267.60) - (644) - 2,284 (86,988.60) - (7,253.50) - 1,587 (21,281.06) /j (89,112.60)

77 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

BUKIDNON SOUTH COTABATO SULTAN KUDARAT ITEMS Halapitan, San Fernando Mindagat, Malitbog Cinco, Banga South Sepaka Labor 17,184-18,259.2 11,124 - 13,804 6,580-7,896 6,600 Inputs Seeds 8,000 -10,000 9,800-11,200 8,800-9,600 9,845.60-10,348 Fertilizers 20,000-20,900 17,430 14,300-15,600 15,299.20 - 15,996

Herbicides 4,400 2,520 2,618-3,096 2,226-2,460 /h Rent Land Dryer 100 116 Equipment plus Labor - Power spray 280 - 980 - Tractor, baby tractor 3,200-3,840 1,200 - 1,600 - Farm animal + labor 1,400 - 2,800 2,016 600-720 1,800 - Thresher - Sheller 1,332 1,225-1,750 Auxillary - Gasoline for irrigation - Gasoline for power spray - Rice hull

- Diesel (krudo) - Transportation cost 1,739 7,910 675 – 1,296 750-1,500 - Commission fees - Sack 1,160 - Twine - Food 860 1,200-1,440 Interest on loan 3,184 - 3,891** 13,080-13,760** 2,358-8,022** 4,440.8-5,584** Mark-up* 2,870 - 4,010 120-180 TOTAL COST 55,015 - 60,390 53,581-58,886 37,973-43,488 37,720.8-40,304 TOTAL GROSS INCOME 59,400 (90 Cavs * 55kls * 35,000 (3,500kls * P10/kl) 37,908 (135 Cavs cobs * 54kls * 41,250 (150 Cavs cobs * 55kls P12/kl) P5.20/kl) minimum or 36,450 * P5/kl) if trader shaves 0.20 cents from prevailing corn price/kl maximum TOTAL NET INCOME (990) - 4,385 (23,886) - (18,581) (7,038) - (65) 946 - 3,529.20 NET INCOME RANGE* (990) - 4,385 (23,886) - (6,781) /k (8,928) - (65)/l 946 - 3,529.20 /a equivalent to three bags of seeds at 10 kilos each bag /b at minimum cost when corn farmers do not have enough resources, they utilize cows and labor to prepare the corn farms /c includes Php30 rodenticide, zinc phosphide and Php84 for rice to mix with zinc phosphide /d shelling and drying /e computed with the cash loaned, no mark up on items /f includes pesticide Marshall at Php552 /g most times, the corn farmers borrow from their financier-traders their consumption of rice for six months from land preparation to harvesting. When bought in cash, rice is Php1,500/sack but when loaned, Php700 is added. Hence corn farmers nets a negative balance of Php9,813-18,653.50 by harvest time /h includes pesticide Solomon, Php750 for the corn hopper pest (CHP) or waya-waya /i variance in income depends if the farm is irrigated, located in lowland or upland or uses manual or power spray /j variance in income depends if farmer uses solar or mechanical dryer /k income may increase if corn is sold at Php13/kilo; Php46,800 (3,600kls*P13/kl). Net income is (Php6781) - (Php12,086) /l income may decrease if traders shaves 0.20 cents from prevailing price of corn. Add to this the 5 - 7 kilos less per sack. Gross income would be Php34,560. Net income would be (8,928) *mark-up already included in the price, shown only to reveal mark-up value **interest on loan already included in the computation ***landlord gets 144 sacks of corn in cobs from harvest, which translates to 51 sacks if shelled and dried (51 sacks*80kls/sack*Php12,50/kilo) ****Range of cost depending on rate of interest, land type,rent or other ranges in expenses. Computation tables are with the publisher.

78 Appendices MASIPAG

APPENDIX 4a Cost of Production of GM Corn per Hectare Barangay Bungsuan, Dumarao, Capiz; Cash Basis (in pesos)

UNIT COST CASH ACTIVITY UNIT PARTICULARS QUANTITY Min Max Min Max 1 Spray of Herbicides Gallon Shine/RR 1,100.00 1,500.00 2 gallons 2,200.00 3,000.00 Sprayer Labor 25.00 18-40 tanks 450.00 1,000.00

2 Land preparation Carabao + Farmer Labor + Animal 200.00 2 carabaos * Php200 * 3 days 1,200.00 1,200.00 (Idas/Tudling) Food Food 50.00 Php300.00*2 days 600.00 600.00

3 Planting Farmer Labor 100.00 10pax * Php100 * 4days 4,000.00 4,000.00 (Panggas) Food Food 300.00 300*4days 1,200.00 1,200.00 Binhi Bags RR/YR 4,300.00 4,550.00 2 bags 8,600.00 9,100.00 After 14 days 4 Side & Top Dress Bags 14-14-14 1,200.00 6 bags 7,200.00 7,200.00

Urea 1,300.00 2 bags 2,600.00 2,600.00 Sulpato 720.00 2 bags 1,440.00 1,440.00 Labor Farmer Labor 100.00 5pax * 2days * 100 * 2 dresses 2,000.00 2,000.00 Food Food 150.00 150 * 2days * 2 dresses 600.00 600.00 Transportation Transportation 15.00 20.00 10 bags 150.00 200.00

5 Spray Herbicide Gallon Shine/RR 1,100.00 1,500.00 1 gallon 1,100.00 1,500.00 Labor Sprayer Labor 25.00 30 sprayers * 25 750.00 750.00 60 days after 2nd spray, 115-117 days after planting 6 HARVEST Sako Pieces 13.00 228 sacks, corn cobs 2,964.00 2,964.00 Straw Lace Straw Lace 35.00 35.00 35.00 Harvesters (pitas) Total corn cob yield 228 sacks

Shared by harvester (nagpitas) 11:1 sharing 21 sacks from Of the 21 sacks corn cobs, it will be 9,240.00 9,240.00 228 reduced to 11 sacks dried kernels. 11 sacks*70kl/sack*Php12.00/kl Manual Shelling Sacks before shelling corn cobs 228 – 21 207 sacks (padpad) (from harvester) Sacks after shelling, corn grains 109.51 sacks Shared by sheller (nagpadpad) 10:1 sharing 11 sacks 5,040.00 5,040.00 Food 60.00 10 pax*3days*60 1,800.00 1,800.00 Drying Sacks before drying 98.51 sacks Sacks after drying 76 sacks Rent for the drying facility 20.00/sack 20.00 * 76 sacks 1,520.00 1,520.00 Hauling Labor 15.00 40.00 * 76 sacks 1,140.00 3,040.00 Trucking transportation 20.00 20 * 76 sacks 1,520.00 1,520.00 TOTAL GROSS YIELD 76 sacks shelled and dried corn 5,320 kilos * 70kls/sack TOTAL GROSS 5,320 kilos * 12/kilo Php63,840.00 INCOME TOTAL COST 57,349.00 61,549.00 TOTAL NET INCOME/LOSS 6,491.00 2,291.00

79 Socio-economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Corn In the Philippines MASIPAG

APPENDIX 4b Cost of Production of GM Corn per Hectare Barangay Bungsuan, Dumarao, Capiz; Loan Basis (in pesos)

CASH Mark-up upon loan Loan Mark-up Interest amount

ACTIVITY PARTICULARS Min (1) Min (2) Max Min Max Min Max 5%*4mos 5%*5mos 7%*5mos Min Max 20% 25% 35% = 20% = 25% = 35% 1 Spray of Shine/RR 2,200 3,000 2,220 3,020 2,664 2,775 4,077 20 20 440 555 1,057 Herbicides Labor 450 1,000 450 450 1,000

2 Land preparation Labor + Animal 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 Food Food 600 600 600 600 600

3 Planting Labor 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 Food Food 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 Binhi RR/YR 8,600 9,100 8,700 9,200 10,440 10,875 12,420 100 100 1,740 2,175 3,220 After 14 days 4 Side & Top Dress 14-14-14 7,200 7,200 7,260 7,500 8,712 9,075 10,125 60 300 1,452 1,815 2,625

Urea 2,600 2,600 2,620 2,700 3,144 3,275 3,645 20 100 524 655 945 Sulpato 1,440 1,440 1,460 1,540 1,752 1,825 2,079 20 100 292 365 539 Labor Labor 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Food Food 600 600 600 600 600 Transportation Transportation 150 200 150 150 200

5 Spray Herbicide Shine/RR 1,100 1,500 1,110 1,510 1,332 1,387.50 2,038.50 10 10 222 277.50 528.50 Labor Labor 750 750 750 750 750 60 days after 2nd spray, 115-117 days after planting 6 HARVEST Sako Pieces 2,964 2,964 2,964 2,964 2,964 Straw Lace Straw Lace 35 35 35 35 35 Harvesters 228 sacks

11:1 sharing (21 9,240 9,240 9,240 9,240 9,240 sacks) Manual Shelling 228 – 21 (from harvester) = 207 sacks 109.51 sacks shelled grains 10:1 sharing = 5,040 5,040 5,040 5,040 5,040 11 sacks Food 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 Drying 98.51 sacks 76 sacks 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 Hauling Labor 1,140 3,040 1,140 1,140 3,040 Trucking transportation 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520

TOTAL GROSS 5,320 kilos * 63,840 INCOME 12/kilo TOTAL COST 62,253 63,421.50 71,093.50 230 630 4,674 5,842.50 8,914.50 TOTAL NET INCOME/LOSS 1,587 418.50 (7,253.50) 7.47%* 9.21%* 12.53%* *percent share of interest to total cost of production

ISBN 978-971-94381-1-3

9 789719 438113